38 SHORT NOTES. 
Stellaria, but bowie = out that he did not absolutely oe 
the generic and specific names—the plant stands in as 
“Sretiarma. Linn. Gis en. Pl. 586. Atstve (media) petalis bipartitis” 
&¢.—and seek another authority. This has been found in Withering 
(Bot. Arr. ed. 3, ii. 418 (1796) ), who seems to have arrived indepen- 
dently at the conclusion that the plant was a Stellaria, and calls it S. 
media, thus retaining the original specific name. Unfortunately this 
name had been applied in 1794 by Sibthorpe (Fl. Oxon. 141) toa plant 
which he was apparently the first to name specifically. Withering 
(l.c. 420) renamed this S. glauca, saying in a note, ‘‘ As it appears 
necessary to introduce nd Alsine media into this genus, the trivial 
‘name affixed to this plant by Dr. Sibthorpe could not well be 
retained.” A sen tlio’ between those who uphold the oldest a 
name and those who maintain the earliest name in the gen 
happily averted by Mr. F. N. Williams, who points out that Stellaria 
media should be —— as of ‘ Villars, Hist. Pl. Dauph. iii. 615 
(1789).”—Jamzs 
Cision ae cungeirotia (Hook.) Spruce in Sonar. —This 
extremely rare species has to be added to the numerous important. 
additions to the list of Scottish Hepatic made by Mr. Symers M. 
has only been collected sparingly in the British Isles, in the south 
of Ireland. In the r recently hig (1898) ‘ Beitrage zur Leber- 
moosflora Norwegens,” Dr. B. Kaalaas recorded its discovery by 
him in 1895 at Udburtjeld, near Fossan, Norway. These are the 
only known stations for this peculiar species. The fine specimens 
sent by Mr. Macvicar would have delighted the late Dr. Spruce, 
who in a letter som af ago lamented that he had only seen very 
meagre examples.— PraRson 
Crrastium arcricum Lange (Jor ourn. Bot. 1898, 493). 
British p, Plant 0) called in recent years oe 7 believe, identical with 
tifoli 
true CU. latifotium in Switzerland, and feel much difficulty about 
identifying it with our end bat on this question experts like 
Messrs. Williams and N. KE. Brown are more likely to be right than 
an caches field-botanist. However, Dr. Lange himself appears 
to have accepted our Scottish form’ as his 0. arcticum, and de- 
termined Mr. Beeby’s specimens from _ as a modification of 
that. My point is, that we have a species in Britain, whether it 
should be named C. arcticum or C. latifolia “distinet from (though 
nearly allied to) C. alpinum; and that it is not a hybrid between 
wo varieties of the latter. That hybrids may occur between 
alpinum and our ‘‘arcticum” is probable enough ; a I am not 
. 
Hae VIRIDIS var. BRAGTEATA (Journ. Bot. 1898, 488).— 
The first publication of this name should stand as ‘ “ [Reichen nbach 
~ 
eaters oa rene Gh ae etre OF ee Le a etek 28 a StS abe ey OS a te eh Ae ty 
