THE GENUS FUMARIA IN BRITAIN 37 



which in Boreau's plant, both type and variety, is stated to be 

 rugose, while in Jordan's F. confusa it should be nearly smooth. 

 But an authentic example of F. confusa at Kew shows the fruit 

 to be rugose, and the same character may be seen in a good speci- 

 men in the British Museum, — F. Schultz, Herb. Norm. Gont. 7, 

 605. It fortunately happens that the Kew Herbarium also 

 possesses two specimens of F. Bastardi, labelled in Boreau's 

 handwriting, '' F. Bastardi Bor. Eevue, Angers, 1847, A. B.," and 

 '' F. Bastardi fi major Bor. Eevue, Angers, 1847, A. B.," which are 

 clearly identical with Jordan's types of F. confusa and F. Borcsi 

 respectively. The labels of these specimens are both annotated 

 " Boreau dedit 30th Sept. 1847," and place beyond question the 

 fact that the type of F. Bastardi, which Boreau at first imper- 

 fectly described in Duchartre's Revue, is the plant which a year 

 later w^as designated by Jordan F. confusa. 



In Haussknecht's Monograph both of these names are ignored 

 in favour of F. Gussonei Boiss. Diagn. Or. vol. ii. no. 8, p. 13 

 (1849), on the ground that F. Bastardi included more than one 

 species, and F. confusa was used to describe a form only. But 

 although Boissier's description may be more satisfactory than any 

 that had preceded it, Boreau's original account of the type of 

 F. Bastardi seems sufficiently clear, even without the confirma- 

 tion of the Kew specimen ; and the fact that his var. /5 major w^as 

 subsequently described as a different plant seems no good reason 

 for ignoring his name F. Bastardi as one including more than one 

 species. It may also be doubted wdiether Haussknecht W'as right 

 in passing over Jordan's description of F. confusa as applicable 

 only to a form, although, it must be admitted, Jordan's characters 

 indicate a weak or cultivated plant, such as his types at Kew and 

 South Kensington actually are. 



While differing from Haussknecht, however, in this point of 

 nomenclature, I now agree wdth him in uniting all tlie rugose- 

 fruited forms of this group, as far as I know them, under one 

 aggregate species. For this I adopt the name F. Bastardi Bor. 

 The plant that I regard as the type and identical wdth F. confusa 

 Jord. is fairly represented both at Kew and the British Museum ; 

 and a notable feature of it (besides the rugose fruits), which is 

 apparent in Boreau's specimen and also in Jordan's, is the absence 

 of the usual dark purple colour in the wings of the upper petal — 

 a feature very remarkable when the plant is growing en masse, 

 as it imparts to the flowers a general salmon-pink hue in place 

 of the rosy-red tint characteristic of F. Borcei and certain other 

 species. 



Of F. affinis Hamm., I have unfortunately seen no authentic 

 specimen, but there are two fairly good types of F. vagans 

 Jord. in Herb. Mus. Brit., and authentic examples of F. Jordani 

 Guss. and F. serotina Guss. at Kew, while both establishments 

 possess good material of F. Gussonei Boiss. All of these plants, 

 in common wath the original specimens of F. Bastardi and F. 

 confusa, are characterised by rather narrow leaf- segments ; by 

 relatively short bracts ; by small, oval rather than ovate sepals 



