146 DESCRIPTIONS OF N.Z. FERNS. 



the early days of the settlement, but had been destroyed by the clearing of the ground 

 and by the cattle. Though the Doctor was generally a good authority on botanical 

 matters, and occasionally contributed papers to the Philosophical Transa6tions of the 

 New Zealand Institute, it was generally thought that, in this matter, he was wrong, 

 and had probably mistaken some fern, with somewhat similar foliage (possibly 

 " Asplenium umbrosum," " Pteris incisa," or even some form of " Lomaria procera " 

 with the terminal pinnae alone fertile), for the Osmunda. Whatever the plant was, it 

 seemed to have disappeared. In 1885, however, I accidentally found a small plant (a 

 mere seedling) at the place which the Doftor had indicated, and two years later, 

 when my plant had proved itself, by producing fertile fronds, a search of the locaHty 

 enabled me to get several more. It is evident, therefore, that, in some way, the 

 0.::uunda spores had reached the spot. It has been suggested that, as Dr. Curll was 

 in the habit of importing plants and seeds, he may have sown the spores ; but it seems 

 to me that if he had taken the trouble to get spores from England, he would have sown 

 them beside the stream in his own garden, where he could protect them, rather than 

 on the flooded interval of a river, on another man's land, more than a mile from his 

 residence, and where the young plants would be exposed to the attacks of sheep and 

 cattle. A more likely theory is, that the spores of the original plants were accidentally 

 introduced with grass seed, at the very outset of the settlement, and had grown up 

 when Dr. Curll first saw them, though they were destroyed as sheep and cattle became 

 numerous. I do not myself, however, see any reason for starting either theory. The 

 Synopsis gives the following habitats for the fern, viz : — " Northern Europe and Asia 

 from Sweden to Siberia, Japan, the Azores, Barbary, the Himalayas, Bombay, Neil- 

 gherries. Cochin China, Hong Kong, Mascaren Island, Zambesi-land, Angola, Natal, 

 Cape Colony, and America from Canada and the Saskatchewan to Rio Janeiro." Surely 

 there is nothing wonderful in a plant which grows on three sides of us, at the Cape, 

 Bombay, and Rio Janiero, occurring in New Zealand also; and as the Rangitikei plant 

 differs from the European one in several important respefts, I feel pretty sure that Dr. 

 Curll's statement was correct, and that the fern was really indigenous. The differences 

 which I have observed between the Rangitikei plant and the European one are as 

 follows: The first indication of reviving vitality in the European plant, in the spring 

 of the year, is its producing some very small preliminary fronds, quite different from 

 those which are afterwards developed, and which do not spring up till several weeks 

 later. The New Zealand plant does not produce these preliminary fronds. In the 

 European plant, the fertile fronds grow erect, while the large barren ones, which do 

 not spring up till two or three weeks later, droop outwards. The New Zealand plant 

 produces both kinds of fronds at the same time, and they all droop outwards alike. 

 Again, the fertile pinnae of the European plant grow ere5t, parallel or nearly so to the 

 rachis, but those of the New Zealand one are set nearly at right angles to the rachis. 



