586 PERSONAL AUTHOEIlIES. 



under inspection, and chiefly through the agency of Distributing 

 Societies, that is to say, the Exchange Club or the Botanical 

 Societies of London and Edinburgh. 



This triple distinction cannot be made on a hard and positive 

 line, however, since several of the botanists named might readily 

 come under two or even all three of the categories stated. In 

 several instances specimens have come in both modes from the 

 same collector ; some of them direct, some of them through a 

 society ; Professors Babington and Balfour are instances in 

 point. Yet the distinction is not unimportant, so far as it can 

 be made, as will presently appear ; the " sp." being a far more 

 safe and satisfactory evidence towards shewing a locality, when 

 direct from a correspondent himself, than is the " sp." received 

 indii-ectly through a society. Taken in connexion with the 

 signs of certainty or doubt "1 ? " and the three abbreviations 

 used in the county lists " sp. ms. cat." (or their non-use) the 

 cited authorities become distiilctively grouped thus : — 



1. Seen in the county by the compiler' himself. 



2. Named in a local catalogue. 



8. A msc. note from a correspondent. 



4. Specimen from the actual collector. 



5. Specimen from a donor, not the coUeotor. 



6. Specimen through a distributing society. 



7. Some personal authority or book quoted. 



8. Authority blank ; accepted but not quoted. 



9. Authority more or less insufficient. " ? " 



Besides these, we have the nos. enclosed ( ) or [ ] . The 

 former ( ) in the case of counties accepted as reported or seen, 

 but the genuine indigenous-ness of the plant there held in 

 distrust, more or less positive. The latter [ ] in the case of 

 counties either positively rejected or else decidedly held to 

 require confirmation. On each of the above classes or categories 

 of testimony some further explanatory remarks appear to be 

 desirable. 



