ADDITIONAL NOTES, ETC. 505 



966. Euphorbia coralloides, vol. ii. p. 300. 



" It is a mistake that Euphorbia coralloides was first 

 recorded at Slinfold as E. Esula. The true E. Esula 

 grew there also, introduced, no doubt, and was taken 

 thence for the * English Botany ' figure. I beHeve it 

 has since been rooted out in improving the Parsonage 

 grounds." (]VIr. Borrer, in Bot. Gaz. ii. 98). 



967. Euphorbia Esula, vol. ii. p. 360. 



I am afraid that this species has been incorrectly ad- 

 vanced into the categorj^ of natives. The station at 

 Birgham Haugh, in Berwickshire, where it was reported 

 to occur wild, tui'ns out to be the site of a former garden 

 or shrubbery. (See Reports of the Berwickshire Natural- 

 ists' Club, i. 182). The other localities seem all liable to 

 susj)icion. 



968. Euphorbia Cyparissias, vol. ii. p. 361. 

 Provinces (1 2) may be added to the area of this very 



probably introduced species ; Mr. Pascoe marking it as a 

 distnisted native of Cornwall ; and Dr. Bromfield enume- 

 rating it as a species certainly introduced to the Isle of 

 Wight. 



970. Euphorbia portlandica, vol. ii. p. 363. 



Erase the county of Sussex from the south limit. Mr. 

 Borrer says that it "was never found in Sussex ; at least, 

 it never could grow in the salt-marsh situation (an islet in 

 the estuary of the Lavant) assigned to it, on doubtful re- 

 collection, by Mr. Smith." (Bot. Gaz. ii. 98). 



973. Euphorbia Lathyris, vol. ii. p. 364. 



Mr. C. C. Babington remarks on this species, in the 

 Botanical Gazette, ii. p. 9, — " I think that the station for 

 this plant at Warley, near Bath, is an indigenous one. It 

 is a verj' steep wood facing the south-west, and in a very 

 warai situation." The difficultj'^ of believing this a native 

 VOL. in. 3 T 



