= 3 = 
But I do not know if the plate has been stereotyped already and 
changes cannot be made any more. In any case, he should send you 
as soon as possible a proof. 
I deliberately left out the vascular bundles as their diff- 
icubtsexamination does not fit a popular handbook. 
Concerringe plant names, why do you not follow the old rule, 
which you observed when you accepted I.flaccida described by 
Shuttleworth and my poorly described riparia and give me credit for 
the names I hsve given, a rule, which Geisebach always followed 
with the names of Wrisht etc ? Or, you actually are inconsis- 
tent,by giving me credit for saccharata but not Chapnmani nor Cali - 
fornica ? In one instant I may be wrong, by keeping the name pyg - 
maea ‚which I first gave to a fragile variety, whereas you!:repor- 
ted first, that it is a valid species, of which I have become con- 
vinced also. That one you may claim’and ignore my note "pyzmaea 
Engelm%s" in Gray. I cubana also remains my species. Note: What do 
you say about the strongz vascular bundles ? 
Now to your questions and statements. I do find scleren- 
chyma cells once in a while and will attribute to them only minor 
importance; with ambigua they are plentiful,I also found them in 
Celifornica, rarely in Engelmanni 
I hope you leave out the species Canadensis and pauperula ,, 
which are based on poor material, for now; they surely are old spe- 
cies; further advances will enlighten us; I am not so sure, that 
further inauiries, on which considerable work will be done in the 
Summer, will produce intermediate forms between species, which at 
present are considered staple. I myself have seen, that vascular 
bundles are very scarcely present on the underside of the leaf and 
on the weakling winter leaves or are miss$ne. The job at hand is 
now to explore the entire circle of forms of the species and to 
determine the variability of the individual characters, I do know, 
6 7 8 9 10 MIıSSOURI 
. BOTANICAL 
copyright reserved GARDEN 
