229 
BRITISH HAWKWEEDS OF THE CERINTHOIDEA 
By Freperic N. Wituiams, F.L.S. 
Ir is to be regretted that the assiduous workers who have 
expen ded so much enthusiasm in the detailed examination and 
critical pea age of the British Hawi wesds have not seen their 
way to define in precise terms the Mostar erage in which the 
multifarious an variable British forms may be grouped. The 
comparison of a nies of Scottish cpaciiieat with an fea of 
Specimens collected in similar stations in the prepare ae districts 
of Central Europe, would doubtless show that many forms now 
considered dimotospecific would be found to be conspeifi And 
were the sections to which these many forms may be referred 
Resi nily defined, it would certainly lead to a satisfactory reduc- 
tion of inighiea as welcome to the field-botanist as to the systematic 
compile 
his account of the species included in the oO edition 
of English Botany, implicitly followed the views expresse ack- 
house’s monograph, and complacently remarks, “ : - ok. dulcis 
to quote continental authorities, as in many ca they do not 
divide the species in the same way a3 Mr. paakhinen: ” ig 
perhaps, for the plodding peters ue they do not. And further, 
@ critical examination of a series of Continental forms would 
probably tend to show that eee species are not to be con- 
sidered endemic to a greater extent and in a greater degree than is 
the ae: in other genera whose concrete units are so protean in 
charact 
laid dowu b Pies, and pa art issue in the yeu sate assign to 
in which the plants of a definite area are enumerated, an area 
i e 
of a pre- 
the Pyrenees. To include what appears to be a natural series of 
Specific forms, it may be defined in ae ssa terms :— 
° » Syn. i. eae elv. ed. 2, ii. p. 5 
(1844); Syn, Deutsch,” Sobry. A andl. 8, p- 1778 (fase. 12, 1898) 
Engl. & Prantl, Natiirl, Pflanzenf. iv. abt. ‘5 p. 877 (1894 
