281 
NOTES ON ‘THE LONDON CATALOGUE,’ ep. 10. 
By tue Rey. E. 8. Marsuatt, M.A., F.L.S. 
work had already been carried through by Mr. W. A. Clarke, 
before I became responsible ; indeed, his draft might almost have 
been printed as it stood. My own task was somewhat needlessly 
hurried, as it was hoped that the Catalogue might be ready for 
improvements to Mr. Druce’s List, which I have found very use- 
ful in the preparation of this paper. As it was published earlier 
the authority will, as a rule, be Druce, in cases where the varietal 
names coincide. 
The greatest cruz, as was inevitable under existing circum- 
stances, arose in connection with nomenclature. Mr. Clarke and I 
did our best; but neither of us has any claim to be an expert. 
was “against my own personal preference, a 
accord with this code, but because they are old aggregates of 
doubtful or mixed application—* spurious antiques,” in fact, as 
one of my correspondents has happily put it. The Catalogue- 
number is refixed to the subjoined comments, as that seems to 
be the most practical plan. 
32. Ranuncutus acris L. Var. pwmilus Wahlenb. was acci- 
dentally left out. 
41. CauTHa rapicans Forst. Var. zetlandica Beeby is drop- 
ped, having been withdrawn by its author. C. palustris L. c. 
minor is of DC. Prodromus i. 44 (1824), who expressly says: “in 
Anglia precipue adhucdum reperta.” It is occasionally some- 
what nodal-rooting. 
56. PAPAVER sOMNIFERUM L. Well established in cultivated 
und in Cambs., Kent, and Sussex; I have also seen it plenti- 
fully in bushy places on the chalk above Shoreham, W. Kent, so 
that its claim to be naturalised is unquestionable. Of the other 
poppies, P. dubtwm L. may possibly be a true native, though I 
bt it. 
70. FuMARIA OCCIDENTALIS Pugsl. Mr. Pugsley writes that 
this should have been placed between Bastardi and officinalis. 
He revised the census-numbers of the group Capreolate, only 
