ADDITIONAL NOTES, ETC. 499 



patula ' was misapplied by Smith, and subsequently by all 

 or almost all English authors, treating of English plants, 

 until a very recent date. Transferring the name of 

 ' patula ' to the Atriplex angustifolia of Smith, in con- 

 formity -with the usage of continental botanists, it be- 

 comes a question, what other name we are to adoj)t for 

 the common English plant, hitherto so usually designated 

 * A. patula,' and figured as such in English Botany ? In 

 his third edition Mr. Babington has returned to that 

 of hastata, rightly used by Hudson in the Flora Anglica; 

 but he stUl separates the A. hastata into two species [not 

 into four, as in the second edition of the Manual] under 

 names of ' deltoidea ' and ' hastata.' These two supposed 

 species of the Manual seem to corresj)ond with the 

 A. latifolia and A. hastata of Koch's Synopsis, second 

 edition ; but the correspondence is only in the aggregate 

 or collective plant, for we cannot unite them by pairs so 

 as to say that A. hastata (Bab.) = A. hastata (Koch), 

 or that A. deltoidea (Bab.) = A. latifolia (Koch). One 

 or other of the two authors must have misunderstood the 

 two species, if two there be, which is not improbable. 



923. Atriplex patula (vera), vol. ii. p. 325. (322, b. A. 

 angustifolia.) 



Atriplex angustifolia and Atriplex erecta, the plants so 

 labelled hy most English botanists, may be taken in com- 

 bination to make the A. patula of the continental bota- 

 nists. The figure of A. erecta in English Botany, plate 

 2223, represents an irregular growth, and cannot be as- 

 signed very satisfactorily to either of the two common 

 species; but it may perhaps belong to A. patula rather 

 than to A. hastata. Be this as it maj', almost all the ex- 

 amples that I have seen labelled " A. erecta " by English 

 botanists, appeared to me to belong to A. angustifolia, 

 and to be scarcely distinguishable therefrom, even as 



