72 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 
least, which is a strong argument in favour of its nativity. Mr. 
rthur Bennett, who has seen my specimens, and to whom I 
described the locality, writes :—* This is just the place it grows in 
in Denmark, &c., and the specimens are like wild specimens from 
the Continent... .. The Cambridgeshire specimens are much 
larger—taller, more gross in all their DA i. To me the 
Lincoln specimens are very near akin to the Cambridgeshire ; both 
are much more robust in all parts than your specimens. .... 
The plants you name as growing with the Selinum are undoubtedly 
native, and I believe with you the Selinum is there. ... I think 
with you the [1826] record does refer to Selinuwm, mistaken for 
Peucedanum which Reichenbach says is often done on the Con- 
tinent.”—J. W. Carr. 
EPIPACTIS REPENS Crantz (p. 31).—In the Stirpium Austriacum 
(fase. vi. 473, 1769) Crantz made the above combination, which is 
: s 
on Helleborine (Journ. Bot. 1908, p- 10) “ the original Epipactis 
it would appear that he subsequently lost grip of its characters, 
and added to that genus plants he more correctly put in Helle- 
orine.”’ 
B 
name for the genus we know as Goodyera. 
make is that if Epipactis [Haller] Boehmer supplants Goodyera, 
the authority for name EZ. repens is, not as is suggested, Eaton, 
already in existence bev Crantz (1769) constructed his Epipactis, 
Oo 
name had been employed since Haller. The fact that Crantz 
date his application of the Linnean trivial to Boehmer’s plant 
which had previously, as noted on p. 31, been without a binomial. 
oo ey edition of the List of British New Plants the name 
will stand : 
ool ee in Ludwig Defin. Gen. Pl. fed. 3], p. 337 
repens Crantz Stirp. Austr. ed. alt. f . vi 4 a 
Ep, Journ. Bor.] = ae SO8C. NI. 473 (1769) 
