298 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 
Robert Hunt’s notice of John Clayton (Dict. Nat. Biogr. xi. 13), 
oat poten. oft Virginian plants, although not the earliest 
made try, may be regarded as the foundation of our 
Caciniss, of ‘die! botany of that region. Under this peace: ye 
astieas are combined—a fact which is at pee evident w it 
s pointed out that the date when the first paper was con 
naa to the Philosophical Tra nencagse was 1688, while tis 
date of birth* of the supposed au ee as given by Mr. Hunt, is 1693. 
he best account of the botanist aries: is that given by B.S. 
Barton in The Philadelphia Medical and Physical Journal, ii. 
141-145, based largely upon information contributed by various 
folk who knew him personally, As this is not easily accessible, we 
extract sien | it the following :—‘ He came to Virginia, with 
father, in the year 1705, and was, te probably, then in his 
twentieth year. His father was an eminent lawyer, and w 
appointed attorney-general of Vagina sha te Clayton was sii 
into the office of Mr. Peter Beverly, who was clerk or protho- 
notary, for Gloster-county, in Virginia. He succeeded Mr. Beverly 
as clerk of that county, and filled the office fifty-one years. He 
died on the fifteenth of December, 1773, in his eighty- eighth 
year. During the year preceding his decease, such was the vigour 
of his constitution, even at this advanced period, that he made a 
botanical tour through Orange- county. It is copia that he had 
county. An incendiary put a torch to the building, and thus 
perished, not ey - acaba: of the county, but the labours of 
Clayton.” The unt contains a warm tribute to — 8 
persia! quulities, iad to his botanical enthusiasm: ‘such 
his desire to obtain a Sige, Son nowledge of the plants of Vir- 
reward for any discovery of a plant unknown to him.” His son 
was ‘‘ the doctor of his parish.” Barton, who adds a warm appre- 
ciation of Clayton’s botanical attainments, says that ‘“‘ he was not 
brought up to the profession of physic ee less had he received 
the ys i of Doctor of Medicine,” as is stated on the titlepage of 
the second edition of the Flora Verginten, Barton regrets that 
the Flora should be referred to as “ the work of Gronovius, though 
nicated to the Leyden professor by Mr. Clayton.” It is difficult, 
however, to see how else it could be quoted, and in the dedication 
* It is stated that Clayton was born “at Fulham, in the county of Kent”’: 
Fulham, Middlesex, seems to have been intended, 
