283 
THE COTTAGE GARDENER AND COUNTRY GENTLEMAN, Febeuaey 1 , 1859. 
1. Cherry Cranberry, is large,round, and of a dark red 
colour, resembling a small cherry. 
2. Bugle Cranberry, so called from tile shape being 
like a bugle bead, long, and approaching an oval. Skin 
pale, and not so deep a crimson as the other varieties. 
3. Bell Cranberry, is bell-shaped, or turbinate, and of 
a dark coral red. This is a very large variety, and is a 
great favourite with American growers. 
(To he continued.) 
ABIES veesus PINUS. 
Deae Me. Editoe, —I have not the pleasure, certainly, of 
your personal acquaintance, to account for such familiarity of 
address ; but I feel as though I knew you, and pretty intimately, 
too, having paid all attention to your weekly “ sayings and 
doings ” ever since 1849. 
But, to come at once to the subject of this letter, which I have 
headed Abies v. Firms, I, in common, of course, with thousands 
of others, am a devoted admirer of that noble class of tree,—of 
comparatively recent introduction into this country,—known by 
the name of the Pine. But, further, having somewhat of the 
old bachelor about me, I am very particular as to the proper 
nomenclature of my favourites. 
Now, the principal object of this letter, is, to ascertain (and 
who so proper to apply to, as dear Mr. Editor of The Cottage 
Gaedenee, my highly-esteemed friend of ten years standing) 
some rule by winch to distinguish a tree belonging to the Abies 
section, from one calling itself Pi mis. 
At present, I confess, there seems to be a “ distinction without 
a difference ; ” and, strange to say, I have been rather confused 
than enlightened, on this subject, from what I have been able to 
glean from your pages. 
A letter, I think, from one of your valued correspondents 
(whose names, as you truly remarked a few weeks ago, are “ as 
familiar to us all as household words ”) giving a list of Firs 
under the two distinct heads of Abies and Pinus, w'ould be con¬ 
ferring a great kindness on many besides myself. But, I will 
just give you one instance of what I mean. 
“ Douglass’s ” Fir is one of my especial favourites, and, of 
course, when conversing with friends on gardening topics, I often 
have occasion to mention it; on the principle, that “ out of the 
abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.” I did so the other 
day, giving it the prefix Abies, by which I have hitherto been 
accustomed to distinguish it (Abies Douglassii). My friend, 
however, immediately stopped my enthusiastic remarks, by saying, 
“ Oh ! you mean Pinus Douglassii,” and forthwith led me into 
his Pinetum, where, sure enough, I found my favourite growing 
luxuriantly. Now, Mr. Editor, one does not, you know, like to 
be knocked down, even in so small a matter as this, especially 
when one feels much interested in it, and has taken every pains 
to be in the right. 
Hence, then, my appeal to you; and I am the more anxious to 
hear what you have to say on this vexata queestio, as I see the 
same discrepancy among your ou'n correspondents (vide Vol. XV., 
pages 152 and 424) ; the use, of the term Abies or Pinus to this 
Douglass’s Fir appearing to be immaterial. 
When “Doctors differ, who shall decide?” One of the 
two appellations, I presume, must be right, and the other wrong, 
or, to use a milder term, incorrect.- I turn to my Latin dic¬ 
tionary, which I have not opened, I am sorry to say, for many a 
long year, and find “ Abies, the Fir, Fir-tree.” I turn to 
“Pinus,” and find the same definition. So I am none the wiser 
for this consultation. 
Perhaps you will kindly say,—if you deign to notice this letter 
at all,—whether I am right in concluding that all Pines are Firs, 
but that all Firs arc not Pines '! and whether the latter term is 
used to designate the choicer and more delicate sorts, while the 
Abies brings to mind the rough and hardy mountaineer ? 
If this be so, how truthfully does dear old Virgil point out the 
distinction, when he talks of “Abies , in montibus altis; Pinu3, 
in Borlis; ” as though the latter required all the care, attention, 
and coddling of cultivation. Yet, again, on the other hand, do 
we not read and speak of the Pine forests of Norway, and else¬ 
where ? Small coddling, I trow, do they receive, and but little 
attention, save what the saw and axe so unremittingly bestow. 
So the more I think, the more I get puzzled, dear Mr. Editor; 
but, rather than go groping on in the dark about what is to me 
a very interesting subject, I have at length determined to write 
to you, feeling convinced, that the best way to gain in knowledge 
is not to be ashamed of exposing one’s ignorance. 
Sincerely apologising for taking up so much of your valuable 
time and space, and wishing you and all your coadjutors, in every 
sense of the term, “ A happy New Year! ” believe me to remain 
a sincere well-wisher of The Cottage Gaedenee, and a warm 
admirer of—“ The Douglass.” 
[More than two “Doctors ” have differed in the classification 
of the Conifers, and we cannot, even though possessing all the 
proverbial self-confidence of Editors, venture to decide which is 
in the right. Don, Lindley, and Rafinesque, say that “ the 
Douglas” is an Abies; Sabine and Lambert say it is a Pinus; 
Link calls it a Picea; whilst Carrifere declares them all wrong, 
and names it a Tsuga, a name which has the botanical merit of 
being the most extravagant. If we refer to Martyn, and others 
of the older botanists, we find under the words “ Fir Tree, “ see 
Pinus,” which intimates that they considered Firs and Pines 
synonymous. The Conifers are not a difficult natural order to 
arrange, and the difference of nomenclature arises chiefiy from the 
generic characters being not generally agreed upon. 
The difference between the genera Pinus and Allies, now mostly 
assented to by botanists, is, that in Pines the leaves are always 
in bundles of two or more together, and surrounded with a sheath 
at their base, whilst in Firs, the leaves are always solitary and 
without a sheath. If you examine your Douglass Conifer, you 
will find, according to those distinctions, that it is a Fir, Abies.— 
Eus.] 
NOTES ON NEW OR RARE PLANTS. 
Rubus nutans. Wall. Nat. ord., Rosacece. Native of the 
Himalaya. — Habit dwarf and creeping, branching copiously. 
Branches three or four feet long, lying close to the ground, and 
rooting at the joints ; round, covered with spreading, purplish- 
tinted hairs. Petioles moderately long, covered with short, 
spreading, purple hairs. Leaves trifoliate; lateral ones ovate, 
and the central ones nearly round; margins slightly lobed, and 
roughly serrated ; smooth on the upper surface, rough and hispid 
on the lower surface. Stipules oblong, somewhat cut at the apex, 
and membraneous. Inflorescence axillary and terminal; pe¬ 
duncles single flowered and solitary, when axillary; but when 
terminal, three or four are produced together. Calyx composed 
of five ovate, large, acuminate sepals, villous on the outside, with 
long, soft, pm-ple hairs. Petals large, nearly round, pure white, 
spreading much. Stamens very numerous. Filaments nearly 
erect, filiform. Anthers large, yellow. Style as long as the fila¬ 
ments. Stigma concave, expanded, and with a villous margin. 
Perfectly hardy, and, being of a neat, compact, trailing habit, 
it is admirably adapted for rockwork purposes. It sends out, in 
rich profusion, its large, handsome, white blossoms in August 
and September. Though yet very scarce, it need not be so very 
long, because every joint, if properly pegged down, and a little 
earth drawn around it, will make a plant, it delights in a 
moderately light soil, rather moist than dry, and prefers shade to 
exposure. 
Lysimachia nutans. Fees. Nat. ord., Primulacece. Native 
of South Africa.— Herbaceous perennial, with erect, glabrous, 
slightly quadrangular stems, about eighteen inches high. Petioles 
short, gradually swelling out into the lanceolate, acuminate limb 
of the leaf. Leaves opposite. Inflorescence terminal, racemose 
or spicate, braeteated. Bracts small, linear lanceolate. Calyx 
monosepalous, cut very deeply into five linear, oblong, obtuse 
segments. Corolla monopetalous ; tube short, with a slightly 
campanulate limb, deeply divided into five oblong, cuneate, erose 
segments ; very dark purple. Stamens five, arising from the 
mouth of the tube of the corolla, erect, dark purple. Anthers 
oval, blackish purple. Style short, thick, awl-shaped. 
A very beautiful, half-hardy herbaceous plant. It is new, and 
very rare. A soil rich, but moderately light, suits it best. Pro¬ 
pagates by division and cuttings; and the protection of a cold 
frame is all the young plants require in winter. It blooms from 
the end of Juno till the end of August. 
Diplol/kna Damtieei. Desf. Nat. ord., Rutacece. Native 
of the Swan River.—Habit dwarf, shrubby, compact, branching 
freely. Younger branches covered with dense, short, stellate 
down. Leaves alternate, oblong, and slightly obovate, entire; 
younger ones brownish, from close, rusty down, above and below; 
