172 



Type collected by the writer at Clemson College, Oconee Co., 

 South Carolina, March 22, 1906 {110. i'/2d). 



Apparently the commonest violet of the southern Piedmont 

 region, and observed in great abundance throughout western 

 South Carolina and adjacent Georgia, extending to an altitude of 

 nearly 5,000 feet in northeastern Georgia. 



Viola rediinca is distinguished from V. anipliata Greene by its 

 smaller size, the spur curved straight upward at the end and 

 laterally flattened and the upper pair of petals turned back to 

 back ; from V. pedata L. (concolorous form) by its remarkable 

 spur and peculiar color of the corolla. My attention was first 

 drawn to the species by the uniform difference in the color of the 

 corolla from that of Viola pedata which I have seen about the 

 city of Washington. 



Viola glaberrima (Ging.) 



V. hastata vz.x. glaherrivia Ging. in DC. Prodr. i : 300. 1824. 



V. tripartita glaberrima Harper, Bull. Torrey Club 27: 337. 

 1900. 



Type locality : " In sylvis et collibus Carolinae septentrionalis.*' 



Viola tripartita frequently has entire leaves which gives the 

 plant the appearance of V. glaberrima and especially is this true 

 in dried specimens. 



V. glaberrima has broader leaves than any entire-leaved forms 

 of V. tripartita, and they are less pubescent, deeper and more 

 glossy green, usually glabrous, with stronger, more regularly 

 toothed margins. 



In my observations during the past spring and early summer 

 upon many hundreds of individuals, I have not yet found the two 

 species growing intermingled or showing any intermediate forms 

 and it seems that Viola glaberrima has as much right to- specific 

 recognition as has V. scabriiiscula of the north. 



Viola Walteri nom. nov. 

 V. canina Walt. Fl. Car. 219. 1788. Not L. 

 V. Miihlenbergii var. multicaidis T. & G. Fl. N. Am. i : 140. 

 1838. " Rocks near Kentucky River, Short r 



