LATHYRUS TUBEROSUS IN BRITAIN 327 
coming near H. Stenstremii, on rag seg hand H. sparsidens.” 
To the latter ee ge aes in the Kew Herbarium) the resem 
blance is gre e Breconshire sat differing from typical 
sparsidens bey in eh sire stem-leaves, in the leaves being all 
more acute, Map teeth not reaching the cuneate not decurrent 
base; the leaves and Lee less hairy and the styles yellow. 
Remains sonaeant | in cultivat 
Hieracium rectulum, os nov. Stem stiff, erect, 1 ft. to 
18 in., clothed with shaggy hair at —_ as also are the petioles 
of the lower leaves; the hair giving place on the upper portion 
and saitcabes to aught floccum and slender stalked glands. Root- 
leaves few, 1 arly withering, oval to elliptic, subacute, gradu- 
arro wing & base, firm but not thick in texture, reddish ; 
clothed on under surface and a with firm, subsetose hairs, the 
upper surface less hairy. Stem-leaves 1-2, often with 1-2 narrow 
bracts above them; shortly petioled, broader at base and more 
acute at point than those of the root, similarly coloured. Panicle 
1—2-furcate, with straight branches, or subumbellate. Heads 3-5, 
short, truncate ; phyllaries very dark, epilose, almost esenescent, 
bearing numerous subequal stalked glands, the outer with an 
evident floccose margin, the inner broadly diaphanous- margined. 
Ligules aug tipped, full yellow ; styles very dark. 
Un ahlstadt, to whom it was sent, 
verdict was :—“ teas towards centroides [cerinthoides] ; none 
of ours.” The plant has a much more evident relationship to 
yes vulgatum Fr. than to any of the Cerinthoidea, a ti 
placed, in the writer’s judgement, next to H. duriceps F. J. Hanb. 
in our list 
n lime rocks at the head of the hills south of Llangadoe, 
Car SCRE Ea at about 1500 ft. elevation; plentifully at a 
soar station, 1907. 
A plant collected by Rev. E. S. Marshall at the Upper Lake 
Killarney, in 1902 I no. 2658), is similar in appearance, but 
details do not agre 
LATHYRUS TUBEROSUS IN BRITAIN. 
By J. C. SHenstone, F.L.S. 
Mr. Minter Curisty suggests (p. 173) that Gerard, in his 
Herbal, has confused Lathyrus tuberosus with L. macrorrhizus, 
H. W. King 
culturist,’ who had at once recognized it, and had told him that 
it was brought from ogee? about the year 1506. Both these 
statements seem worthy of further consideration; and the follow- 
ing references to this plant in old English works will serve, 
ho bone, to contribute to our knowledge of it in Britain, and add 
me details to Mr. Christy’s valuable article. 
oe tracing the statement made by the “ eminent floriculturist ” 
to its origin, we shall find that it was, almost certainly, based 
