Botanical Notes. 61 



coincided with the longer diagonal, was found to he 87 c. m. long 

 and 1.9 c. m. at its greatest width. The included bark was so 

 strongly compressed as to be very solid. With the second cut, 

 the tension was largely released, and the crack almost immediate- 

 ly opened to 5.5. c. m. at its greatest width. 

 J * D. P.P. 



Sisyrinchium bermudiana. — On first seeing the specimens of 

 Sisyrinchium collected in the Bermudas, by Sir J. H. Lefroy 

 and Mr. Moseley, I suspected that they were specifically different 

 from the plant commonly known as Sisyrinchium bermudiana, 

 and after comparing them with numerous specimens of the plant 

 so called from eastern North America, I was convinced that such 

 was the case. Referring to the literature of the subject, I found 

 this view supported by all the early writers who had actually seen 

 the Bermudan plant. The history of the two species concerned 

 is soon told. Towards the end of the seventeenth century Plukenet 

 figured and briefly described what he termed the Bermuclan and 

 the Virginian Sisyrinchii, the types of which are still preserved 

 in the Sl«>ane Herbarium at the British Museum. Dilleniu s. who 

 had opportunities of seeing living plants at Eltham, followed 

 Plukenet in distinguishing these two species, and published better 

 figures and more complete descriptions of them in the ' Hortus El- 

 thamensis.' Linnaeus, who we assume did not see the Bermudan 

 plant, as there is no specimen in his herbarium, united the two, as- 

 varieties of one, under the name of S. bermudiana. Miller, who 

 seems to have been the most accomplished English botanist of 

 his day, was the first to restore the two forms to specific rank. 

 This was in 1771. In 1789 Curtis figured the true Bermudan 

 plant, and insisted upon its specific rank, remarking that he had 

 living plants before him of both the species figured by Dillenius. 

 Unfortunately he gave it a new specific name, for which he 

 afterwards expressed his regret. The first De Candolle wrote 

 the text to the excellent figure of the Bermudian plant, 

 which was published in Redoute's Liliacees, at the begin- 

 ning of the present century, and he particularly points out its 

 distinctive characters. I have not taken the trouble to turn up 

 every book in which the two species are likely to be mentioned, 

 and I have not ascertained who was the first botanist to re_ 

 unite them ; but the North American botanists seem to be agre ed 



