Moft of the old Botanifts regarded this plant as a diftin& fpecies, and the obfervations of the moderiis have 
fhewn that their opinion was well founded; they confidered it indeed as an Alfne, and this alfo was a further 
proof of their difcernment, for the A//ine medza and our plant are undoubtedly of the fame genus, inafmuch 
as they agree exactly in the parts of fruétification, number of ftamina excepted, and that is found to vary in 
the A/fine media: the Cerafteum femidecandrum is admitted to -be of the fame genus as the others, though it 
has only five ftamina ; the Alfne therefore fhould be removed to Szellaria, and called Stellaria Alfine ; the 
Ceraftium aquaticum ought alfo to be placed with them, as it agrees better with the character of a Stellaria, 
than a Cerafitum, efpecially in its feed-veffel, a part which is of the firft confequence in determining the 
genus, and which Linn aus has not fufficiently attended to. | 
Linn £us, in general too cautious in making fpecies, confiders our plant as a variety of Stellaria graminea ; 
but as it differs from that plant in fo many eflential points, we conclude he never had an opportunity of 
fairly examining and contrafting the two in a living ftate: DirrzNrvs has minutely defcribed it, efpecially the 
flowers, but neither he or any other author that we are acquainted with, has noticed the callous tips of the 
leaves, though very confpicuous, nor the particular fituation of the leaves refpecting the ftalk and each other, 
(fee the defcription.)9—D oo» v, as appears from Rav's Synoffis, had the merit of obferving that the flowers 
were produced ex alis foliorum, which is certainly one of the moft ftriking chara&ers of the fpecies, but this is 
not produced in the common way ; the fa& is, the flowers would be terminal, did not.a new kind. of fhoot or 
furculus, rather than a continuation of the ftem, proceed from the panicle. 
The petals being fo deeply divided, and fpreading fo far afunder, has occafioned fome miftakes in the de- 
{criptions which authors have given of the flowers: J. Baunine defcribes them with ten petals; VaILLant 
on the contrary, with five, and thofe undivided; this author, affuming to himfelf a fuperior degree of difcern- 
ment, complains that Morison and Ray had defcribed them as divided almoft to the bafe ; a more minute 
infpeGion would have taught him that they were not fuch fuperficial obfervers as he imagined. 
It is a very common plant in wet fpringy meadows, and efpecially on the edges of the ditches, which in- 
terfe& fuch meadows, but cannot be faid to be truly a bog plant, like Anagallis tenella, or Drofera. 
It flowers from 7une to Auguft. 
