REPORT ON THE 



of the Alpine section. As regards the yellow of the show flower, 

 it does not appear in its true proportions to the casual eye ; but 

 if you will carefully wash away the paste, you will find that it is 

 laid upon a yellow ground. It seems to be the function of paste 

 to play a game of deception. Kerner's views have been partially 

 approved by Mr. J. G. Baker, of Kew ; but he appears to lean to 

 Primula Balbisi as a prominent progenitor, and he associates the 

 edged flowers and the Alpines as at least not specifically distinct. 

 The Rev. F. D. Horner, who combines experience as a raiser with 

 knowledge of species and a fine faculty of observation, reckons 

 Primula farinosa, P. scotica, P. marginata, P. intermedia, and 

 P. viscosa as concerned in the parentage ; and probably he would 

 separate the edged flowers from the Alpines as of different origin. 



Finally, I propose to you that we may with advantage regard 

 the edged or show Auricula and the Alpine Auricula as, for present 

 purposes, specifically distinct. The general agreement of the 

 Alpines is with P. commutata and P. pedemontana, the last 

 named being emphatically reflected in it. On the other hand, 

 P. ciliata of Moretti may be associated with P. Auricula as con- 

 cerned in the formation of the florists' flower. 



But, after all; this is like arguing in a circle. The two that 

 I have selected as begetters of each group are specifically one or 

 two at the discretion of the botanists, as they may take broad or 

 narrow views. We are in the same plight as regards the Pri- 

 mulas as we were in regard to the Daffodils before the Congress 

 operated, when, as you will remember, a great reduction of the 

 species was carried into effect. I will venture now to say, that 

 the employment of names in the expression of our ideas as to the 

 origin of the Auricula, must be subject to the possible reduction 

 of names by the Revising Committee. I can find a dozen or more 

 so-called species that are possible parents of the Auricula, but as 

 I question their specific independence, I do not feel that making a 

 catalogue is, in this case, the solution of a problem in biology. 

 As for Palinuri, I cut short the connection by dismissing it as a 

 possible progenitor of Auriculas. 



Let us now make a brief study of an Auricula with reference 

 to the facts that are before us. In certain characters it is con- 

 stant. The leaves are stout in texture, often leathery, sometimes 

 slightly cartilaginous. The flowers are always in a many-flowered 

 visible umbel, never, like those of the Primrose, appearing singly 



