358 SHORT NOTES. 
in several southern English counties, yet relegated to the “excluded 
species,” on the ground of its being a “cultivated ornamental 
plant.” I would ask, is it commonly grown in gardens? Leucojum 
vernum and one or two other species are not unfrequently to be seen ; 
but I do not remember to have noticed this particular plant, with 
its coarser, stiff-growing herbage, except where it had been purposely 
brought in from “wild” stations. 
As regards Iris fetidissima, Mr. Lloyd Praeger writes to me that 
upon its frequency on the south coasts of England, as well as its 
continental distribution. (I happen never to have gathered this north 
of the Thames, and in one or two of the localities known to me it 
may be only a relic of cultivation. 
Respecting the supposed extinction of Huphorbia Peplis, the fact 
that I paid two fruitless visits to Shalford in search of Cyperus 
Juscus, and found it abundan hird and f 
over ground where in other seasons not a specimen was to e€ seen, 
appears to justify my hope that Tramore may still produce this rare 
little spurge. 
Ireland is still a very long way from being thoroughly explored, 
botanically; doubtless, as time goes on, several species now kno 
to occur in only one or two places will prove to be more frequent, 
and some additions will be made. The presence of an —_——— 
group of undoubtedly native Irish plants (Spiranthes Romanzoffiana, 
Eriocaulon septangulare, Naias flexilis and Hieracium — auratum) 
gives good ground for believing that Sisyrinchium angustifolium and 
Juncus tenwis are equally native; the latter is not likely to ha 
been imported into Co. Kerry with American hay, and the former 
is widely distributed, several of its habitats being quite off the 
beaten track. 
In conclusion, let me apologize for the length of this paper, and 
assure my friends that nothing has been further from my intention 
than a personal attack on them. 
SHORT NOTES. 
ALOPEcURUS PRoNUs Mitten. — Last winter Dr. Ascherson asked 
me for some information respecting the above-named grass, and it 
may be well to put on record the result of the inquiry I made. — 
na 
(1860); the plant was gathered at Albourne Place, near Hurstpier- 
ot, Sussex, July, 1854. Syme (Eng. Bot. ed. 8, vol. xi. p. 26 
(1872) ) has the following note :—*‘ A. pronus I have always under- 
stood to be a form of 4. geniculatus, with the stems not geniculate. 
Dr. Hooker, however, in the Student’s Flora, says it is a ‘prostrate 
form’ of A. pratensis, As I have not seen the plant, I am unable 
to offer any opinion. The Rey, W. W. Newbould informs me that 
from a casual examination of the specimens, named A. pronus in 
