208 



" I obtained the ' Flore de Terre Neuve et des lies St. Pierre et 

 Miclon, avec figures dessinees par V auteur sur la plante vivante: 

 Paris, 1829.' It is the copy presented by De la Pylaie himself to the 

 Library of the Garden of Plants. It seems this is the only livraison 

 which ever appeared. It has no figm-es. It treats entirely of marine 

 plants. As there is no table of contents or index, I examined it page 

 after page, and no mention is made of the Calluna vulgaris." 



There is a reference made in the Flora Bor.-Amei'., Vol. i, p. 31, 

 to a paper on Sarracenia purpurea by De la Pylaie, thus : " De la 

 Pylaie in Ann. de la Soc. Linn., v. 6, p. 388, t. 13." Thinking that 

 the mention of Calluna might have been made in this paper, I re- 

 quested my friend to examine this also. He says, in reply : — 



" There is no such work. There is the Annals of the Linnasan So- 

 ciety, London, but the organ of the sister Society in Paris is ' Les 

 Memoires de la Societe Linneenne,' and of this publication there is no 

 sixth volume. In the fifth volume there Is mention made of two me- 

 moirs by De la Pylaie ; one on les cristatelles (which is published in full 

 in the volume) and the other on the Sarracenia purpurea. An aster- 

 isk refers the reader to this note at the foot of the page : — ' Ce memoire 

 paraitra dans le vi'* volume de nos Actes.' But the ' Memoires ' ended 

 with the fifth volume, and ' actes ' is used synonymously with ' Me- 

 moires.' The catalogue of the Library of the Garden of Plants 

 contains this note : ' The work ended with the fifth volume.' " 



These statements, which render Hooker's reference so inexplicable, 

 awaken sbme doubt whether De la Pylaie has anywhere mentioned 

 Calluna in his printed papers. He is the prime authority for its occur- 

 rence in Newfoundland, and yet his record of it cannot be found. Dr. 

 Gray tells me tliat Dr. Joseph Hooker found no clue to the Newfound- 

 land plant. Certainly the published evidence is neither direct nor 

 conclusive that Calluna was ever discovered in America. Dr. Gray, 

 in his note to Mr. Rand's paper in SiUiman's Journal, Vol. xxxiii., p. 27, 

 says : — "If the claim for Calluna to be regarded as an American plant 

 rested wholly or mainly upon this Tewksbury locality, it would not 

 gain acceptance." It now appears that this is the only basis for 

 such a claim. De la Pylaie's record may be somewhere found. But 

 with all the evidence before us now, there would be reason to suppose 

 some misapprehension on his part, unless his statements bear the un- 

 doubted mark of certainty. 



Prof. Thomas McCulloch writes from Truro, Nova Scotia, to Dr. 

 Gray, who has kindly lent me the letter : — 



" In Nova Scotia, heather is unknown, save as an exotic. Upon 

 the southern seaboard there exists a low, shrubby evergreen, exceed- 

 ingly like it, and which I have heard asserted by Scotchmen to be 

 heather. The plant in question I have never met with in bloom ; but 



