378 Naiural-Historical Colletions. 
suspect, Linnzus originally meant the plant of Barreliere and Cavanilles, the 
specific name of “* marifolius’’ must be retained to it, as has been done by De- 
candolle, and our British plant ought then to be called Cistus, or (as I keep up 
the genus Helianthemum of Tournefort), Helianthemum ace Under this 
name it will be found in Decandolle’s Prodromus 1. p. 277, N. 67 ; and, I may 
remark, that I agree to the other synonyms brought under this species ns Mr. 
Bastiat in his Cat. Pl. Pyr. Smith, indeed, states, that ‘‘ C. canus of Lin- 
neus is a different plant,” but Linneus’ description belongs to ours, (at least to 
a variety of ours which has the leaf hoary on both sides) ; and the herbarium of 
Linnezus in some cases throws no light on what he originally intended, having 
taken up many of his species from indifferent figures published by others. It is 
even possible that Smith had in view C. incanus, a true Cistus, and widely dif- 
ferent from this or any other plant found in Britain. Helianthemum marifolium 
Dec. (Cistus marifolius Cavan.) is a very scarce plant, and only found in the 
south of Europe. 
2. C. guttatus Lin., or Helianthemum guttatum of authors. On this I shall 
not trouble you with any remarks, further than that from’ Nos. 25 to 29 inclu- 
sive. of Decandolle’s species are mere varieties, and perhaps scarcely even merit 
that name. 
3. Cistus or Helianthemum ledifolium. This species I was not so fortunate 
as to meet with either growing, or in any herbarium at Montpellier, which habitat 
alone, however, is given by Linnezus. lLinnzus describes his plant as glabrous, 
so also do Willdenow and Decandolle, but Decandolle doubts if it ever were 
found in France. Smith again ane of the English plant, that it is downy 
{pubescens in the Flora Brit.): Now Linneus, in his Mantissa, constituted a 
C. niloticus from Egypt, which ae only made to differ from his C. ledifolius 
by being hairy or pubescent. It is strange that Sir James Smith no where takes 
notice of this C. niloticus, although, from what I have said, it must be clear that 
the British plant belongs to it, and not to C. ledifolius. Of the true Hel. 
niloticum, but agreeing wiih the British H. ledifolium, I possess a specimen 
from Foz in Provence, and therefore I suspect that the smooth plani, C. ledifolius 
Lin, may after all turn out to be a mere accidental state of Hel. niloticum,; 
taised from seeds in a garden i ina colder and moister climate, under which two 
circumstances all the species of this genus lose much of their pubescence. 
4, C. surrejanus. Perhaps cal plants occur under this name. The 
principal character depending on ‘“ petals lanceolate’ is absurd, and applies 
equally to an accidentally deformed state of several species in the south of Eu- 
rope. Of the British plant in question, a few specimens found lately by my 
friend Mr Christy have the leaves as white underneath as in the Hel. vulgare 
(Cistus Helianthemum Lin.) This, when sent to Sir James Smith, a short 
period before his death, was affirmed by him to be the true plant, adding that 
it even had “‘ the beautiful character of having the leaves dotted beneath!’ but 
I can positively say, that such was invisible tome when I examined Christy’s 
specimens. As to Smith’s other characters, I can see nothing in them to dis- ° 
tinguish the plant from some states of Hel. vulgare, that are more common in 
the south than with us; and had that state of it, called by some Hel. nummu- 
larium, with leaves hairy but nearly green on both sides, been known as a British 
plant, 1 would rather have referred to it, Smith’s C. surrejanus, by his de- 
scription. 
5. C. Helianthemum (Hel. vulgare. Dec.) is a well-known plant, much sub- 
ject to variation, according to the exposure, aridity, and nature of the Sols as 
the judicious Willdenow has long ago observed. 
6. C. tomentosus (Hel. tomentosum, Dec.) About this I ought to be caus 
tious of speaking, having never yet possessed a specimen from this or any other 
country named from authority ; mas indeed, have I ever seen one that possessed 
the character of ‘* hoary stipules.” Many plants I have in my herbarium, with 
all the other characters given to C. tomentosus, particularly the “ calyx all over 
hoary ;”’ but every one of these I refer without hesitation to Hel. vulgare, al- 
