OF KUHNIA. 
77 
1824, and all appear to be new, his K. critonia 
is that of Mx. probably and nearer to K. ros- 
marinifolia , yet distinct, and I named it K. tu- 
ber osa in 1833. His K. eupatorioides ? deem- 
ed doubtful by himself, altho’ very near the Lin- 
nean Sp. is somewhat peculiar, and perhaps 
distinct, it is my K. dasypia. It is from the 
prairies of Alabama. There also grow his 3d Sp. 
K. glutinosa , a new sp. which I possess and is 
quite distinct. It has been adopted by the com- 
piler Eaton, with the other usual 2 sp. in 1833 
in his manual of Botany, 6th edition, who never 
saw any of the plants; he ascribes with Pursh to 
K. critonia , pubescent and petiolate leaves ! 
F ew of these botanists appear to have taken 
the trouble to consult the original description of 
Linneus, Arduin and others, and thus they as- 
cribe the characters at random. The original 
Eupatorium alternif olium had Stem terete 
pubescent , leaves lanceolate , petiolate , decur- 
rent , triuncial , rough: corymbs multiflore 
compact , calix striate . This is the Siberian 
plant of Arduin tab. 20. But Linneus in his 
last edition decribes the K. eupatorioides with 
Stem rigid and branches in the middle smooth , 
leaves alterne subpetiolate broad lanceolate 
serrate rugose , uncial , upper ones linear lan- 
ceolate entire ; corymbs small ; which agrees 
perfectly with the plants found near Philadel- 
phia in 1836. Yet he refers to it the above 
disparate plant of Arduin, and also the figure 
of Plukenet 87. 2 ! best figured in his son’s de- 
cads tab. 11. Meantime the plant of Gaertner 
is described by Smith with entire leaves, linear 
lanceolate and corymb paniculate pauciflore. 
Yet Michaux’s plant (with Gaertner’s name) 
