ENGLISH BOTANY. 251 



The seven plates in the two parts comprise three additions to 

 the Flora,:— Ranunculus Jlabellatus, Arab is aljnna, and Malva cretica; 

 two introduced plants, Clatjtonia sibirica and Potentiila norvegica; 

 the Kentish form of Pohjgala amara, and a substituted plate of 



Brasiiea Napus. The last-named is decidedly good, and the others 

 compare favourably with those of the original work. 



A prominent feature in the Supplement is the substitution of a 

 number of older names in accordance with the results of recent 

 research. There is also a considerable amount of additional 

 synonymy. In the latter connection we may point out the in- 

 correctness of quoting varietal names as synonyms of the broad 

 species, as though the whole could fail to contain its parts. For 

 instance, under Rosa rubiginosa, Mr. Brown quotes R. rubiginosa 

 var. comosa Dumort. and another variety as synonyms. Even if this 

 were allowable, it would be absurd to quote only two of the many 

 described varieties not kept distinct by British botanists. The 

 "nomma nuda" of the London Catalogue are in some cases accepted, 

 and in others ignored. 



The first part commences with an attempted re-arrangement of 

 the ma jw -minus group of Thalictrum. A variety, T. majus var. 

 ca pill are N. E. Br., is described, with the following remark : — " The 

 variety capillars may be nothing more than a state induced by shade 



or moisture, or both combined " This is not the only instance 



in which a variety is described on confessedly inadequate knowledge. 

 A number of varieties which Dr. Boswell did not think worth 

 notice, such as the cultivated colour- varieties of Anemone nemorosa, 

 are introduced. 



No critical group seems too difficult for Mr. Brown to dispose of. 

 Thus he favours us witli his views at considerable length on the 

 Batrachian Banunculi, of w T hich his knowledge appears to be con- 

 fined to the dried specimens at Kew and South Kensington. The 

 only apparent result is the addition of the name of R. trichophyllus 

 var. demersus N. E. Br. to the already excessive synonymy. 



Dr. Boswell thought it desirable, when there were two about 

 equally common forms of a species, to give varietal names to both, 

 and Mr. Watson adopted the same plan. From Mr. Brown's 

 intended corrections under Papaver somniferum and Cochlearia 

 unglica, it appears that he did not understand this. The adoption of 

 the generic name Corion in place of Spergularia gives the opportunity 

 of appending " N. E. Br." to four species and two varieties. 



Fifty-five pages are devoted to Rubus. A footnote states, " Con- 

 cerning the members of this very difficult genus I express no 

 opinion, as I have never made any attempt whatever to study 

 them." In spite of this statement, we find Mr. Brown making 

 himself the authority for one specific and five varietal names. The 

 thirty-three pages devoted to Horn are prefaced by a similar dis- 

 claimer of any knowledge of the genus, and it is not surprising to 

 find the account is altogether unsatisfactory and incomplete. The 

 great evil of paste-and-scissors work at critical plants is perhaps 

 more apparent here than elsewhere, as varieties of widely different 

 values are placed on the same level, and the synonymy is imperfect 



