ON SPERGULA ARVENSIS. 17 



description, seems to differ very slightly from the type, the principal 

 character residing in the papillae (seminum papillis fuscescentibus). 

 This variety Reichenbach states he had not seen, but as I have 

 noticed plants of S. vulgaris permanently exhibiting shades of 

 colour (other then black, the normal colour) in the papillae, I am 

 inclined to reject such characters as worthless. Although when 

 growing, as far as my experience goes, S. sativa and S. vulgaris are 

 quite distinct, and can be easily recognised, their differences seem 

 to disappear when dried, and the only reliable characters are in the 

 mature seed. The number of stamens is very variable in all the 

 forms. S. sativa has minutely punctulate, margined seeds, and in 

 a living state can be distinguished by its decidedly viscous, dull 

 grey-green leaves and branches ; on the other hand, in S. vulgaris 

 the seeds are obscurely margined, or totally devoid of wing, and beset 

 with club-shaped papillae, generally quite black in fully-matured 

 seeds. When growing the latter is conspicuous on account of its 

 light grass-green leaves, altogether brighter-looking and less viscid 

 than the former plant. 



In addition to the two plants just named, another form has been 

 treated as a species — S. maxima, Weihe, and which, however, is 

 nothing but very luxuriant vulgaris, only differing from that plant 

 in its taller stems and larger seeds. At any rate, that is the verdict 

 pronounced by Neilreich ('Flora von Wien '), Brebisson (' Flore de 

 la Normandie '), and Boreau (' Flore du Centre de la France '), and 

 other critical botanists have either called attention to the slight 

 characters separating it from S. vulgaris, or have united it with that 

 plant. D. Douglas found S. maxima u common on the banks of the 

 River Columbia at Fort Vancouver, and near the ocean in open 

 places," and, believing it to be distinct from previously described 

 species, accorded it specific rank under the name of N. ramosissima* 

 It was Sir W. J. Hooker, in ' Flora Boreali-Aniericana,' vol. i., p. 93, 

 who first identified Douglas's plant as Weihe's "maxima." 



With regard to the distribution of S. sativa and S. vulgaris hi 

 Britain, the former is nearly everywhere common, whilst the latter 

 seems to find its maximum of frequency in the south, although 

 Syrne, in ' English Botany,' says that he has only seen it from 

 Lancashire. The ' Flora of Middlesex,' however, gives a number 

 of localities, and I have specimens from various places in the 

 neighbouring county, Surrey. At Kew both forms grow together, 

 whilst at Petersham I could find no trace of S. sativa, and S. vulgaris 

 was very abundant. A number of plants collected for me at 

 Albury, near Guildford, by Mr. W. Kemp, of the Royal Gardens, 

 Kew, all proved to be 8. vulgaris, as also were specimens collected 

 at Lyndhurst, in Hampshire, by Mr. J. G. Baker. Babington, in 

 'Prirnitiae Florae Sarnicae ' (1839), says, "sativa has not been 

 observed in these islands"; and I have the evidence of Mr. W. 

 Hillhouse that the same state of affairs still obtains, for during a 

 ramble over all the Channel Islands during last summer he failed 

 to find a single plant of S. sativa, although he kept a special look- 

 out for it. Some months ago I was botanising in Yorkshire (North 

 and West Ridings), in the vicinity of Edinburgh, in Perthshire and 



D 



