BRITISH JUNGERMANNIiE. 
( J. setacea. ) 
Obs. In the month of February I have found Gemmce abundantly scattered among the 
terminal leaves, minute, variously shaped, but always more or less angular (f. 5), pellucid, 
of a pale greenish color, inclining to brown. 
Few Jungermanniae seem to have been less understood by Crypt ogamic Botanists than 
the present, which is not surprising, if we consider the great similarity that exists between 
it and J. trichophylla , especially in barren specimens. In such case the most obviously 
distinguishing characters are its shorter leaves, placed more distantly and in pairs, and 
strikingly incurved, so that the plant altogether wants the mucor-like appearance, pointed out 
by Dr. Smith as characteristic of the other species ; but most of these circumstances are 
liable to some variation in different situations. In fertile specimens, indeed, no difficulty will 
be found to occur; the extremely delicate calyx, its lateral situation, and its long laciniae 
being remarkable on the slightest examination with the microscope. 
The specific name of multiflora was, in all probability, imposed upon this plant by 
Hudson, in consequence of the numerous footstalks represented in the Dillenian figure here 
quoted, and has in point of priority a right to be retained ; but, as not only that engraving 
(although cited by Hudson and Linnaeus), but also the original drawing in Sir Joseph Banks’ 
library, are extremely unlike our present plant, and especially as this species, in consequence 
of the paucity of its flowers, has been thought, by another eminent botanist, deserving of a 
name directly the reverse in its meaning, that of J. pauciflora, I have considered it best to do 
away an appellation which can only tend to mislead, and to substitute in its room the very 
appropriate one adopted by Weber. It is, indeed, merely in compliance with the opinion of 
preceding botanists, and contrary to my own, that I here refer to the Dillenian figure, which 
appears most like a very common appearance of J. bicuspulata, and was considered by Weber 
as so doubtful, that he quotes it under J. setacea with a mark of uncertainty. I was in 
hopes of ascertaining the fact by examining the specimen corresponding with the number in 
the Dillenian Herbarium, but, to my great disappointment, what is there preserved is an 
injured morsel of J. connivens , Dicks., a plant to which neither the figure nor description 
bears the smallest resemblance ! It appears to admit of no doubt but that Dr. Roth, who 
is in general most accurate, and many other botanists, have confounded this species with 
J. trichophylla ; and even the acute Ehrhart, who, by his close attention to the genus Junger- 
mannia, has added several new species to the catalogue, and assisted our investigation with 
many interesting observations on their structure, at the same time that he seems to have 
known the present plant under the name of multiflora, was not conscious of the difference 
between it and J. trichophylla. He has consequently fallen into an error in his Beitrdge, 
which renders his severe remark on the Swedish botanists in that place the less excusable. 
J. trichophylla Linn. Sp. (he says*) J. multiflora Linn. Mant. and J. sertularioides Linn . Sw . 
Meth. are all three one and the same plant, whatever may be said against it. But is it not 
singular that the Swedes, who would wish to lord it over the whole vegetable kingdom, 
and over the botanists of all parts of the world, do not know the plants of their own 
country ? ” 
Beitrage, n. p. 46. 
