166 



5- Veronica RUDERALis Vahl, Enum. PI. 1 : 66. 1805. "Habi- 

 tat in ruderatis versuris et humidis locis frigidis Peruviae." 

 Type not seen nor verified, but specimens from Ecuador 

 and those collected by the writer in Colombia show the 

 identity of this with the plant here considered. 

 This is the plant identified in the seventh edition of Grays 

 Manual as Veronica humifusa Dickson. This species, published 

 in Trans. Linn. Soc. 2: 288. 1794, and found by James Dickson 

 on "very high mountains of Scotland," was described by him 

 as a plant wholly prostrate, with cordate-subrotund minutely 

 scabrous leaves which often occur in threes or fours, and with 

 a short raceme of a few crowded flowers. Whatever this may 

 be, it surely cannot be our plant. 



Veronica ruderalis appears to be the most cosmopolitan species 

 of the genus, and doubtless V. serpyllifolia must be considered 

 as a Palaearctic derivative from it. It is a boreal or mountain 

 species through Eurasia and the Americas. One European 

 description which I have had no opportunity to see, that of 

 Veronica neglecta F. W. Schmidt, Fl. Boem. i: 12. 1794, may 

 give a name which possibly must supersede ours. This is identi- 

 fied by Koch, Syn. Fl. Germ. & Helv. 529. 1837, as a larger 

 'Dvate-leaved form of V. serpyllifolia. However in the fifth 

 (Hallier's) edition of the Flora von Deutschland of Schlechten- 

 •dahl and Others, 17: 150, while this is similarly characterized, 

 the glandular-pubescent plant is distinguished as var. borealis 

 Laestad. So it would appear safer to consider neglecta as but 

 a robust state of the appressed-pubescent serpyllifolia. 



I agree with Prof. Fernald, in Rhodora 4: 194. 1902, that 

 "the evidence at hand indicates that this large-flowered variety 

 is the only indigenous form of V. serpyllifolia in Northeastern 

 America." I follow his later judgment as expressed in the Grays 

 New Manual, and in Rhodora 13: 124. 191 1, in according this 

 specific rank. However I see no basis for the decision of the 

 new Gray that serpyllifolia is likewise indigenous. Its occur- 

 rence -in North America is south of the region normally occupied 

 by species common to both this continent and Europe. 



Apparently this has been collected in our range by C. F. 



