56 BULLETIN 179, U. 8. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
the vicinity of Scarboro, Me., to Fortress Monroe, Va. It occasionally 
occurs a few miles inland in Connecticut, and in New Jersey it ranges 
inland to within about 12 miles of Camden and to Bordentown; it 
has also been collected at Sellersville, Pa. | 
Prunus maritima is recorded by Chapman (13, p. 131) from Ala- 
bama, and the basis of this record is an imperfect specimen collected 
by Buckley. Sargent thinks (66, p. 28) it possible that this speci- 
men represents a form of P. alleghaniensis. It is much more prob- 
able, however, that it is P. umbellata injucunda. The species has 
also been reported from the shores of Lake Michigan (82, p. 33; 5, 
p. 214) in the vicinity of Chicago and near the head of the lake. 
Most of the specimens cited by Higley and Raddin are in the herba- 
rium of the Northwestern University, and all of these were found to 
be P. pumila. <A considerable part of the region about the head of 
the lake was explored the past summer, but without finding any trace 
of P. maritima. A letter from E. J. Hill, who went to Chicago in 
1874 and has probably studied the flora of the region as carefully as 
any one, states that he has never found the species there, although 
familiar with its reported occurrence. 
Prunus sphaerocarpa was described from the New England sea- 
coast; P. declinata was very briefly described and no locality given, 
but the description apparently refers to the beach plum; P. acuwmi- 
nata, ‘‘Hab. in Virginia,” is apparently also this species, although it 
can scarcely be positively identified from the description alone; 
P. pygmaea was described from garden material grown from North 
American seed and distributed as Prunus maritima by the “‘Herrn 
von Wangenheim”’; P. pubescens was apparently based in part on 
P. sphaerocarpa Michx. “on the seacoast of New England” (not on 
P. sphaerocarpa Swartz), and on material collected ‘‘in the western 
parts of Pennsylvania, on the borders of lakes,’”’ the latter locality 
unquestionably representing a different species. P. littoralis and 
P. sphaerica are also apparently based on P. sphaerocarpa Michx. ; 
P. pubigera is based on “‘P. pubescens Poir. (non. Pursh.).’’ Poiret 
does not describe a new species, but quotes the description of Pursh. 
Prunus maritima is an attractive ornamental, on account of the 
profusion of its bloom, and it is occasionally planted in the East. 
It has given rise to a few named varieties, Bassett (5, p. 214), Alpha, 
and Beta, and the fruit is frequently gathered from wild trees. When 
grafted and grown under favorable conditions, it sometimes becomes 
a small tree. This species attracted the attention of horticulturists 
comparatively early and was apparently often considered quite as 
valuable as Prunus americana. No doubt fruit was often found as 
- large and as palatable as that of P. americana in the eastern part of 
its range, but when horticultural development in the West brought 
to the attention of pomologists the better forms of the latter and of 
other species, P. maritima gradually ceased to be mentioned. 
