Original Articles. 
ON THE GREAT WATER-DOCK OF ENGLAND. 
By Henry Trimen, M.B., F.L.S. 
(Tas. 140.) 
Agarn, through Mr. Warren’s skilled acuteness in the field, I am 
able to place asa Rumex—R. maximus, Schreb.—on the British list. 
As in the case of R. sylvestris, figured and described in the last volume 
(p. 129, t. 131), so in the present communication the object aimed at is 
rather to incite English botanists to a closer study of these perplexing 
plants, and to call attention to the range of form assumed by some 
common and neglected species, than to affect to add to our flora 
‘a new British pla 
he great Water-Dock has always been a familiar plant to the 
botanists of 1 of this country. It was well understood by Gerard, ioe go 
y, Petiver and others, as is seen from their descriptio 
specimens, though their rough figures are, except that of Petiver, wu un- 
satisfactory. From the root having been considered a drug of so * 
importance, the plant was more generally familiar. ka we 
f 
with imperfect and brief descriptions, instead. of nse Cheers matters 
led for a sre to confusion, It is n what Linneus did 
aiitian's figure, whichis no doubt our nie be In the same stan 
book, however, Linneus named a North American ‘lostoe collected 
by Clayton R. Britanniea,* and Hudson, when in the edition 
(1762) of his « Flora Anglica,” he tried, as in duty bound, to fit all _ 
though erroneously 
a 
g 
& 
& 
= 
bs] 
cf 
OB & 
> 
B 
= 
E 
1B 
= 
“°° 
S 
B 
& 
My 
The sini with these characters has been a general Heer on 
ver those botanists 
who, as will be presently noticed, consider it a a hybrid -sioboldad the 
rank of @ species, 
In ot this form before the notice of English botanists, it 
* Dr. A. Gray hasonly recent] satisfactorily determined this to be the plant 
called by him in his ‘‘ M andy yr ghar biculatus (see Journ. Bot. 1872, p. 2), 
N.S. Vou. 3. [FEBRUARY, 1874. ] 
Oe 
