It is nearly forty years since Mr. Brodie first noticed the plant 
here figured, and sent specimens to Mr. Turner, by whom they 
were then considered to be a variety, which he called angustissima, 
of Delesseria alata; and in this judgment he was generally 
followed till the year 1840, when, in deference to the repeated 
protests of Mrs. Griffiths, I ventured, in the ‘ Manual,’ to separate 
and describe Mr. Brodie’s plant under the temporary name of 
Gelidium ? rostratum, recommending it to the notice of observers, 
and adding that ‘““my own opinion on this puzzling matter was 
not very decided.” 
Were all the specimens now before me equally characteristic 
as the one I have figured, I should have no hesitation in adding 
mine to the other opimions in favour of this plant ; but unfortu- 
nately I possess some, in which I can clearly trace the compressed 
edge of the frond passing into a very narrow membrane; and 
others which seem to be exactly intermediate between very narrow 
alata, and true angustissima. 1 am therefore now persuaded 
that Mr. Turner’s judgment was strictly correct ; and Dr. Dickie, 
who has had the best opportunities of studying it m its living 
state, writes, ‘‘ Both plants grow together upon Lam. digitata ; 
both are in fruit at the same time; and in making up packets 
of duplicates I have. often been puzzled whether to call my speci- 
mens G. rostratum or D. alata.” 
Mrs. Griffiths, however, adheres to her already recorded opinion. 
“T have always’”’, she says, “acted on the maxim of my first 
instructor, Bishop Goodenough, who in one of his early letters 
wrote, ‘never let what I or any one else may say weigh against the 
evidence of your own senses’; therefore, when I see the young, 
tender and perfect shoots of one plant furnished with a membrane, 
however bare the rest of the plant may be, and the equally young 
and tender shoots of another perfectly naked, though some of the 
branches are compressed, I must decide that they are not the 
same species, particularly as the difference has been constant for 
so many years.”” Whichever opinion be eventually adopted, it 
must at least be acknowledged that D. angustissima is a very 
remarkable form, and as such deserving of a place in this work. 
Fig. 1. DELESSERIA ANGUSTISSIMA :—of the natural size. 2. Portion of a 
branch with tetraspores. 3. An axillary ramulus, with the same. 4. 
Portion of a branch with tubercles. 5. An axillary ramulus containing a 
tubercle. 6. Portion of a branch with the commencement of a winged 
margin :—all magnified. 7. Fragment of the surface of the frond. 8, 9. 
Transverse sections of different specimens :—/ighly magnified. 
