Knowlks and I'liiij.ips — Oil llie Claim of the Snoivjlalcc, &^c. 391 



always the same kind nl' siiuatiiiii. There is a specimen iVnin the Devonshire 

 station in the Herbarinui df the National Museum, 1 iiiMiii, lalielled, "Semi-tidal 

 marsh, Totnes, Devon. June, 1876. Ex. Herb. Th. Chandlee." The plant is 

 supposed to be extinct in the Northumberland and Westmorland stalions. 

 We have, however, recently seen a specimen I'mm a Westmorland locality — 

 viz., the mouth of the Eothay where it Uows into Windermere — collected in 

 1894. 



The earlier English liotanists were divided in their opinion as to whether 

 Lcucojum acstiviim. should be regarded as native. Curtis, the discoverer, as 

 sve have seen, was satisfied on this pomt. Watson, however, called it a denizen 

 — that is, a plant " At present maintaining its habitats as if a native species, 

 without direct aid of man, but lialjle to some suspicion of ha\-ing lieen originally 

 introduced by human agency, whether l_iy design or accident " ; and he gives 

 Aconitum, Chelidonium, Saponaria, Myrrhis, and Buxus as examples of what 

 he means by denizens. 



Most of the botanists of Watson's day were influenced by his views on 

 this question. The trend of opinion nowadays, however, especially among 

 those who have studied the plant in situ, would seem to be in favour of con- 

 sidering Leucojum acstivum native in England. E. S. Marshall holds that it 

 is native both on the Thames and in Ireland. Druce considers it native in 

 Oxfordshire. Hind records it as native in SulTolk. Dunn, in his " Alien 

 Flora of Britain," says, " As its undoubtedly native range includes Northern 

 Continental Europe, it may be considered as a rare native in Britain also." 

 Sowerby in "English Botany," after mentioning that it is apparently native 

 by the Thames, adds that in its typical form it is less often met with in culti- 

 vation than L. Herrnandezii, which has smaller flowers, and frequently does 

 duty for L. aestivum in Botanic Gardens. We also found this to be the 

 case, and have seen L. pulchdlKm (L. Hermandezii) labelled L. acstivum in 

 more than one Botanic Garden. 



On this point, as the two plants are so similar in general appearance, and 

 so easily confused, it may be well to say a few words about the dift'erences 

 between them. We went very carefully into tliis matter during the last two 

 seasons, examining and comparing hundreds of fresh specimens from the 

 Continent, from England, and from Ireland. (We Wduld here gratefully 

 acknowledge the assistance we received from the Keeper of the Kew Herbarium 

 in making out the distinguishing characters of the two species.) We found 

 that the edges of the scape in L. i^ulchellum are quite entire, whereas in 

 L. aestivum they are characterized by what appear to be rough translucent 

 teeth. These are easily seen when the plant is held up to the light. Wo 

 were much puzzled by these teeth, as we could find no reference to thcni in 



