SHORT NOTES 185 
England formerly referred to R. tripartitus and to which the name 
of intermedius has usually been applied by British botanists. This 
view is held by Herr Freyn, who has given particular attention to 
the question. - Upon gee te to Knaf’s original description of 
seem to be ae sufficient as pee that it was not intended to 
refer to our plant. Knaf describes his plant as intermediate between 
and the time of flowering a month earlier; but he adds that it is 
perhaps only a variety of R. aquatilis with the leaves ‘‘conformibus.” 
The distribution of our species (setting aside Knaf's Bohemian 
plant) is distinctly Western European, and the allied species 
Rh. tripartitus and R., ololeucos do not extend much farther eastward, 
so that it seems very improbable that it would occur in Bohemia. 
We are indebted to Herr Freyn for suggesting the identity of the 
British plant with Batrachiwm lutarium, Revel, which was described 
and figured in Act. Soc. Linn. Bord. 1834 (p. 413, pl. 4). Through 
the kindness of Mr. Charles Bailey we have had an opportunity of 
comparing our plant with specimens of B. lutarium from the original 
locality (La Teste, Gironde), and we feel satisfied that they are the 
same. KRevel’s species was, as far as we have ascertained, first 
placed in Ranunculus by Mons. Georges Bouvet, and M. Bouvet has 
kindly given us the reference to the original publication of the name 
in Bull. Soe. d’Etudes scient. d’ Angers, for 1873 (1874), p. 96. Our 
conclusion, therefore, is pet the British plant should stand as 
R. ee Bouvet; and of the two forms figured by Saeoicy in 
Flor. de la Gironde (1882) it appears to correspond most nearly to 
the var. intermedius (p. 16, fig. 8), which has the lobes a the leaves 
more obtuse than in his var. genuinus.—H. & J. G 
Misuse or THE Inpex Kewensts. — In the last Ae of the 
mice Vie: of the New Zealand Institute, xxxi. 1898 (1899), from 
pages 404 to 415 there are five citations of Gaya Lyallii as of 
Hook. f Ss, in various forms. This is a mistake, due to a 
a of the text of the Index, ii. 580, coupled. with the un- 
authorized statement of the Clarendon Press on the back of each 
volume and part. The true citation is—Gaya Lyallit E. G. Baker 
in Journ. Bot. xxx. (1892), 187; syn. Plagianthus Lyallit Hook. f. 
ex Benth. in Journ. Linn. Soc. vi. (1862), 103; Hoheria Lyallii 
Hook. f. Fl. N. Z.i. 81, t.11. When the genus Plagianthus ¢ ame to 
be revised for press, Mr. E. G. Baker had reduced the species — 
tioned to Gaya, but at a date too late to be included in the 
Kewensis; all that could be done was to indicate its present a 
by edge © ‘* (Gaye sp.),’ a has been misinterpreted as shown 
—B. Daypon Jacxso 
eas 7 Seeps.—There is an early notice of drift seeds in Pena & 
Lohelie’ Adee (1570), p. 395, where probably “sh himself 
says: ‘+ Permultas eins & naucleris fabas Phasiolésve ex 
Americe nouo orbe . . . . sed alias perquam raras habeas nos, 
