REPORT FOR l888. 
227 
with my Roundstone specimens, which are more thickly covered with 
longer and stiffer hairs (so as to become almost asperous) than the 
Scotch plants. Messrs. Linton do not refer to the colour of the 
flower. In marshy ground, near the Boat of Garten, in Easterness, 
occurred plants with pale flowers, tube white and much hairier than 
the Caithness plants, which I am inclined to refer to var. ericetorum , 
although not absolutely identical with the Irish plant. It should be 
borne in mind that Dr. Johnston, when he described his M. 
montanum , said “the stem was hispid. Leaves hairy all over.” 
Gaudin, in ‘FI. Helv.,’ vol. iv., p. 122 (1829), describes a variety of 
M. pratense as “minor, foliis lanceolato-linearibus,” and calls it var. 
paludosa. He gives Sturm’s ‘FI. Germ.,’ vol. i., fasc 9, tab. 11, as a 
good figure of it. This must be very near Johnston’s plant. — Ed. 
Melampyrum sylvaticum L. Aberfeldy, Mid. Perth, August, 1888. 
— G. C. Druce. 
Mentha alopecuroides , Hull. Harling to Larling, Norfolk, W., 3rd 
October, 1888. In a situation which cannot be said to be quite free 
from suspicion, as the mint grew in a damp corner of a field, near 
cottages. But, I think, in Norfolk this mint is taken from the marsh 
into the cottage garden (and there known as “ Lamb’s mint ”), and 
then may become an outcast before losing any of its wildness. My 
locality was on the border of a very marshy district. — E. F. Linton. 
It is not included in ‘ Kirby Trimmer’s Flora,’ although given in 
‘ Student’s Flora ’ for Norfolk. — Ed. “ In his very full account of the 
Norfolk mints in the supplement to his Norfolk Flora (1884), Mr. 
Trimmer gives nine stations for this mint. I myself have no doubt 
it is really a native of Norfolk in some stations .” — Arthur Bennett. 
M. pubescens , Willd. Hort., Croydon, 1888 . — Arthur Bennett. 
“ See l’Abbe Strail’s note on this in last ‘ Report,’ the same plant 
from the same roots ! ” — Arthur Bennett. 
Mentha • . Damp hollows in Ainsdale, and Freshfield 
Sandhills, W. Lancashire, September, 1881. — J. Cosmo Melvill. 
“ Echantillon incomplet.” — l’Abbe Strail. 
M. gracilis , Sole (et Smith). Shotover, Oxford, September, 1888. 
— G. C. Druce. See ‘Report,’ 1887, p. 187, where the Abbe Strail 
identifies it with the M. gracilis , Sole (et Smith), dwelling especially 
on the subulate plumose calyx teeth, and lanceolate leaves, as the 
characters which distinguish it from gentilis. On seeing l’Abbe 
Strail’s determination I sent fresh specimens to Mr. Baker, who writes 
“ I feel pretty sure this is the wild original type of cardiaca , the 
variegated form of which is so common in gardens. I see cardiaca 
is recorded from Woodstock by Syme. We have a good many of 
Sole’s Mints in the herbarium, but they are not named (by him) in 
accordance with the names in his book. It is very interesting.” 
It may be well, since there is a confusion in authority, to go 
thoroughly into this matter, and, as Sole’s ‘ Menthce ,’ published in 
1798, is rather an inaccessible book to many botanists, to give 
a precis of his views. M. cardiaca (of Smith) is figured and 
described as M. gentilis , M. floribus verticillatis, bracteis longis 
acuminatis sessilibus, caule erecto ramoso fusco ; foliis obiongo 
