x 
586 
_ gloufly, try te profit by their obfervations 
3 
whenever they afford any new light. How 
would the two worthy beotanifts firft men- 
tioned fmile to fee their authority brought, 
with fo much pomp, again their old: 
friesd and correfpondent,. to whofe opi- ” 
nion on fuch a point they would botb pro- 
bably fhew much more deference than it 
deferves ! 
Page 628. I muft repeat that Lanium 
ainplexicaule bas the habit of purpureum, 
and agrees with it more or lefs in the 
nakednefs of part of the ftem. In this 
paragraph inftruCtion is communicated to 
us in the Latin tongue. May I afk 
the learned writer, whether he has not 
here edopted words, phrafes, and (as far 
as he could) the ftyle cf his compofition, 
froin fome Linnean author? From whom 
did he learn (though he has not practifed 
at without four errors of his own or the 
printer’s in fix lines) to mark his adverbs 
and ablative cafes? 
Page 641. The criticifm in this pa- 
racraph feems to me ill-founded, for the 
peculiar prominence in the calyx belongs 
to a whole tribe of fpecies of Thymus, of 
which the Acizos is one, perhaps the only 
one that has fallenin Mr. Caiey’s way. 
The Serpyllum has no fuch ftruéture, 
though the feeds do fwell the calyx when 
they ripen, asin all this Natural Order, 
but by-no means in the fame manner. 
Page 735. There needed no mark of 
doubt as to Geranium pyrenaicum, being 
the perenne cf Hudfon’s firft edition, as 
Tournefort’s fynonym, and the particu- 
jar places of growth, clearly thew it. 
Page 859. The figure of Curtis, in- 
cluding variety y, is quoted in its proper 
place. 
Page 942. I was never informed of 
the-particular place of growth of ‘the Cy- 
pripedium ; nor, 1 believe, did Mr. Rud- 
fion mention, probably becaufe he did not 
know, that he was net its firft difcoverer. 
I have now concluded my anfwers to 
Mr. Caley’s lait ietter, but he may, per- 
haps, require notice to be taken of fome 
plants mentioned in his former one. 
I did not think myfelf poffeffied of fuf- 
ficient authority to admit Ixta Bulboco- 
dium. XY do not remember having feen 
fpecimens, nor could I tell which of the 
numerous varieties of that plant might be 
found in Guernfey, ner how far they were 
ciflin& fpecies; and if fo, witch ought 
to, be retained as Bulbocodium. 
doubt, I shave hitherto left the plant for 
fome one to Hlultrate on the fpot, rather 
emittins than introducing a doubtful fub- 
ject. Lowas more efpecially cautious in 
this infiance, as Guernfey or Jeifey plants 
Letter from Dr. Syiztht. 
In this: 
[ Dec. 1, 
appear to me fcarcely more entitled to a 
place in our Flora than Gibraltar ones ; 
and though I may follow my predeceffors 
refpecting the plants they have admitted, 
I would not be the firft to introduce a 
new f{pecies fo circumftanced. 
The pretended Schenus minimus is fill 
more dubious. I have feen a poor fpe- 
cimen of it in my friend Forfter’s hands, 
but could not defcribe a new Species from 
fuch materials. How can it have efcaped 
any botanift that, by Hudfon’s own de- 
{cription, (Sym. Syn. 197) this plant is 
evidently a triandrous Funcus, and no 
Schaenus? When { have an opportunity 
of looking at it, I expeét to find it a ftarv- 
ed F. uligincfus, or perhaps capitatus of 
Weigel. If the latter, it will be new ta 
our Flora. 
Viola amana w2s omitted becaufe the 
fpecimens fhewn me did not accord with 
the fpecific character, and feemed a variety 
of lutea. I alfo wait for Mr. Forfter’s 
long-expeéted treatife on the genus, to 
learn to diftinguifh its fpecies with more 
certainty. 
I am not ignorant of the fuppofed new 
Hieracia found in Scotland, having receiv- 
ed them from their finders, Mr. Mackay 
and Mr. G. Don (not Mr. Donn, of Cams 
bridge). One of them has been moft er- 
roneoufly taken for H. Kalmiz, an Ame- 
rican plant, with which it has nothing to 
do. ‘They are very dificult to determine, 
and I have exchanged feveral letters with 
my corre{pondents about them, as well as 
concerning fome Potcztille, which are ina 
fimilar predicament. Sub judice lis eft, 
but we fhall hardly refer our caule to the 
writer of the above criticifms. If I had 
been difpofed to adopt new plants on in- 
fuficient authority, I might have decked 
out our Flera with many borrowed piumes 
and talfe jewels. Amongft other things, 
I might have admitted Mr. Caley’s Bzera- 
cium ovatum, which I did not doubt was 
an error; and which now proves, by his 
own account, to be a well-known Lin- 
nzan {pecies, the villofum. | 
I have always, Sir, been averfe to li- 
terary difputes, and hed the above critr- 
cifms concerned mytelf alone, I fhould 
have trufted to the good fenfe and know- 
ledge of the botanical worid to fee, by 4 
fingle glance, how trifling orhow falfe they. 
were. But when I perceive a poor rep- 
tile attempting to undermine or deform 
the adamantine columns of the temple of 
{cience, I: with to tura dt afide, not to 
crufh it: its flime might for a while pol-: 
lute the edifice, though it could not fap 
the foundations. J. E. Smivrx. 
Norwich, Nov. 8, 1804. °° + 
To 
