924 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 
August 3rd of the ee year, the neveery of the find, I 
again visited the spot, and found the plants as before just in 
flower. Several of the characters given by Moench are carefully 
is especially apt; none o ae es British Stel- 
larias, except S. Holostea, are so ee as this form. “ Stipulee ’ 
s 
S. graminea brat ti 422,, as 
founded on the e pla nt, described as ‘Alsine aquatica folio 
gratiole, stellato fore ” by Dillenius, et dg Gissam, p. 58 (1719). 
It is true that S. graminea var. B Linn hitherto been identified 
ith S Salaun Retz. [1795] (= S. glance With. [1796]); but 
if these two ng to the , aS many critical 
tanists wou admit, then, even apa m reasons of priority, 
and solely on the ground of both being founded on the ica 
Dillenian plant, S. Dilleniana (1777) would be the correct nam 
of the species, as well as being earlier in date 
_This Walton ee plant seems to differ, however, in man 
ed 
ore evident in the lower half towards the base), as also are vied 
bracts, and further, the outer sepals are ciliate along the ma 
A synonym of S. palustris var. viridis Fries, under gandhicr 
ns G. 
ith 
There is every reason to believe that this lusus 2 is identical with 
@ var. parviflora Klett & Richter, FI. Poipeigs, p. 385 
(1830), but I bare not seen a copy of this local flora 
synonym un vert pile, 
oes pauciflore,” but give no el a for this particular 
Leers, Fl. Herborn. p. 107 (1775), has also described a “ Stel- 
laria Dilleniana ”’; : bakit it is so obviously a description of S. uligi- 
nosa Linn ‘ and i i d connection with the plant mentioned 
by Dillenius is so idontly an error of determination, that it may 
nee out of account. And again, S. Dilleniana of Reichenbach’s 
Germ. excurs. p. 784 (1833) 1 * no more than a form (or state) 
