A 4st o 1A, See Dees pra CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Mao" University Library QK_ 112.M49 a = a ‘ TMT olinovel Cornell University Bleria The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924024538963 THE NATIVE FLOWERS AND FERNS OF THE UNITED STATES IN THEIR BOTANICAL, HORTICULTURAL, AND POPULAR ASPECTS. BY THOMAS MEEHAN, PROFESSOR OF VEGETABLE PHYSIOLOGY TO THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE, EDITOR OF THE GARDENERS’ MONTHLY, ETC... EPC. SERIES Il VOLUME I. ILLUSTRATED BY CHROMOLITHOGRAPHS BOSTON: L. PRANG AND COMPANY. Vel se CopyricHT, A.D 1880, By CHAS. ROBSON & CO. PREFACE TO: SERIES I, HEN the first series of “The Flowers and Ferns of the United States” was issued, the hope was expressed that although that work should be complete in itself, the public would welcome another, or even successive series; unvil, peradventure, the whole Flora of the United States should be included. It is pleasant to the author to know that part of this hope is realised, indeed all of the hope that can be realised up to the present time. Not the least among the author's gratifications is the complimentary manner in which the work has been received by his botanical associates. It was a task rarely attempted, to bring exact botanical knowledge toa level with popular comprehension,—to give it a place among a great variety of the more cultivated branches of knowledge,—and, above all, to accommodate such a work to the popular purse. That this could be successfully accomplished the author had the courage to hope, but he was scarcely prepared for the cordiality with which eminent men of science have received this people’s work as an acceptable contribution to scientific literature. Amongst these the author has especially to make his acknowledgments to Professor Asa Gray, who in “Silliman’s Journal of the Arts and Sciences” for May, 1879, compares the drawings not unfavorably with those of Mr. Sprague, who for many years has been at the head of botanical drawing in this country. Considering the very low price at which this work is supplied, the fact that Professor Gray should have been led to compare it with the best and most expensive botanical work in our country, must be accepted as very high praise. We may now only say that while the publication of the work has been transferred to the American Natural History Publishing Company, Lim- ited, of Philadelphia, an association organized primarily for the purpose, Messrs. Prang & Co.’s excellent artist, Mr. Alois Lunzer, will still make (3) 4 PREFACE TO SERIES II. the drawings, and the same well-known firm continue to execute the Lithographic plates. The same assistance will be extended by numerous correspondents all over the United States; and with the increased love of the task which the success of the first venture brings to the author, he hopes to make this second “General View of the Native Flowers and Ferns of the United States,” at least as interesting as the first. Special acknowledgments of friendly aid will appear as the work pro- gresses; but more than this is due to Professor C. S. Sargent, of the Cambridge Botanic Garden, to Mr. Jackson Dawson, the gardener at the Arnold Arboretum of the Bussey Institute, and to Mr. John H. Red- field, the conservator of the Herbarium of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, for continuous and generous assistance on frequent occasions. THOMAS MEEHAN. GERMANTOWN, PHILADELPHIA, May, 1870. CONTENTS OF VOLUME SECOND SERIES. SARRACENIA DRUMMONDII. xummond’s Pitcher Plant ‘ a * 4 * ENGELMANNIA PINNATIFIDA. Cut-leaved Engelmann Flower 2 5 = - DIPLOPAPPUS LINARIIFOLIUS. Sand-paper Star Wort. : : : . 2 ONOCLEA SENSIBILIS. Sensitive Fern ‘ ‘ * : . : ” SARRACENIA PSITTACINA. Parrot-headed Pitcher Plant . r ii 5 é LILtIuM CANADENSE. American Yellow Lily . - x ‘ * % SOLANUM TORREYI. Torrey’s Solanum . « é ie F - : ) PoLYPoDIUM CALIFORNICUM. Californian Polypody : P ‘ : : % SARRACENIA RUBRA. Red-flowered Trumpet Leaf.—Walter’s Sarracent+ IMPATIENS FULVA. Spotted Touch-me-not, or Snap-weed ‘ ‘ IRIS VERNA. Spring Iris. 3 3 . ‘ . : WooDsIA OBTUSA. Common Woodsia R ‘ : : Fi PHACELIA BIPINNATIFIDA. Bipinnate Phacelia ‘ ‘ 7 A (vn) PAGE 13 17 25 29 33 37 4t 45 ag 53 Vill CONTENTS OF VOLUME RUDBECKIA FULGIDA. Brilliant Cone Flower. ‘ CYPRIPEDIUM ACAULE. Stemless Moccasin Flower % CAMPTOSORUS RHIZOPHYLLUS. Walking Leaf : j ° POLEMONIUM REPTAN’ Creeping Greek Valerian ‘ CYPRIPEDIUM PUBESCENS. Large Yellow Moccasin Flower EUPHORBIA MARGINATA. Snow on the Mountain . ¥ \SPIDIUM FRAGRANS, Sweet Shield Fern a * ERIGERON BELLIDIFOLIUM. Poor Robin’s Viantam . % PINGUICULA LUTEA. Yellow Butterwort . 5 ANEMONE VIRGINIANA. Tall Anemone.—Thimble Weed CHEILANTHES VESTITA. Hairy Lip Fern ‘ . ° Tris MISSOURIENSTS. Rocky Mountain Iris 3 é SOLIDAGO ULMIFOLIA. Elm-leaved Golden Rod P SICYOS ANGULATUS. Star Cucumber G ‘3 é ASPLENIUM EBENOIDES. Scott’s Spleenwor : COMMELYNA VIRGINICA. Common Day Flower. é NYMPH/EA FLAVA. ‘Audubon’s Yellow Water Lily CROOMIA PAUCIFLORA. Few-flowered Croomia . is ASPIDIUM NEVADENSE. Sierra Nevada Shieid Fern, ° PAGE ° e . : . Tor . 3 3 > 105 ; Z ‘ : » 109 7 é ‘ : » 113 e i ; 117 3 12% : e : a h25 CONTENTS OF VOLUME I, 1X PAGE NYMPHEA ODORATA. Sweet-scented Water Lily ° ° ° ° LoBELIA FEAYANA. Dr. Feay’s Lobelia ‘ ° ° ° a : : 2 137 CYNTHIA DANDELION. The Dandelion Cynthia ow a Me af. ee en eee CERATOPTERIS THALICTROIDES. The Horned Fern e oe. Se ee ee ee ee ee © ARIS/EMA TRIPHYLLUM, Three-leaved Indian Turnip . a 2 c ° 2 0 « « 149 GERANIUM MACULATUM. . Spotted Crane’s-bill Fa , : F ; fs ° ° € o «153 CENOTHERA MISSOURIENSIS. Large-fruited Evening Primrose. ° ° 2 ° ° ° ° 157 ASPIDIUM MUNITUM. Chamisso’s Shield Fern , é ® ° ° ° ° ° ° . I6I STENOSIPHON VIRGATUS. The Stenosiphon . ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° » 165 ANDROSTEPHIUM VIOLACEUM. Crowned Lily ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° >» 169 CASSIA CHAMAECRISTA. Sensitive Pea . ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° » 173 GYMNOGRAMMA TRIANGULARIS. California Gold Fern, ° e <3 ° B ° ° ° o 197 LONICERA SEMPERVIRENS. Scarlet Trumpet Honeysuckie ° ‘ ° 6 ee) aie ° o ~=«ESE CHELONE GLABRA. Turtle-head . . r ° ° ° ° 2 0 ° ° o «6185 TOWNSENDIA SERICEA. Silky Townsend Flower ‘ ‘ - ° ° o> Je -<6 2 189 POLYPODIUM FALCATUM. Sickle-leaved Polypod, or Liquorice Fern. z 7 23 ‘ ° «193 SARRACENIA DRUMMONDII. L. PRANG & Company, Bc PLATE 1.. ‘ ‘ u . F ‘ 4 , ; - Ae ‘ ee ‘ i : : = F wee ‘ e : ae: SARRACENIA DRUMMONDII. DRUMMOND’S PITCHER-PLANT. NATURAL ORDER, SARRACENIACEA. SARRACENIA DRUMMONDI, Croom.— Leaves elongated, erect, trumpet-shaped, narrowly winged; lamina erect, rounded, short-pointed, hairy within, and like the upper portion of the tube white, variegated with reticulated purple veins. Leaves two feet long. Scapes longer than the leaves. Flowers three inches wide. (Chapman’s F/ora of the Southern United States. See also Wood’s Class-Book of Botany, under the name of S. Gronovii, var, Drummiondit.) Sy: ONGFELLOW, in describing an old-time slave hiding from his pursuers in a southern swamp, says: “ Where will-o’-the-wisps and glow-worms shine, In bulrush and in brake: : Where waving mosses shroud the pine, And the cedar grows, and the poisonous vine Is spotted like the snake: «Where hardly a human foot could pass, Or a human heart would dare, On the quaking turf of the green morass He crouched in the rank and tangled grass, Like a wild beast in his lair.” It is not often that a poet writing with one subject only in view, at the same time happens to paint the portrait of something entirely absent from his mind. Yet every one who has collected Drummond's pitcher-plant will recognize a very fair picture of it amidst its surroundings in the lines quoted. It is a car- nivorous plant, secreting in its pitcher-like leaves water into which insects are enticed, drowned, and eaten, as some botanists say. Besides growing among poisonous vines spotted like the snake, it is itself spotted; and just where the waving “Spanish moss” shrouds the pine, and in swamps where a human foot can (5) 6 SARRACENIA DRUMMONDII.—-DRUMMOND’S PITCHER-PLANT. scarcely pass, it seems as like a wild beast as it “crouches” and waits for its prey as any plant can be. The genus is confined wholly to the Atlantic portion of the United States, and because of their very remarkable form must have been among the first of America’s plants to receive marked attention from the white man on his arrival in the new world. It is believed to have been referred to by John Henry Bauhin, who published a history of plants in Switzerland, about the year 1650. The name Sarracema is, however, of comparatively recent origin, having been given to the genus by Tournefort, a distinguished French botanist who flourished at the opening of our present century, in honor of Dr. Sarrazin, whom Milne calls “an ingenious French- man, and who introduced several Canadian plants into Euro- pean gardens.” Our text-books tell little more than this of him. Gray’s “School Botany” merely says, “named for Dr. Sarrasin, of Quebec,” and this is repeated in the same author’s “ Manual,” except that the name is spelled Sarrazin. Professor Wood makes it “ Dr. Sarrazen,” so that the student has the choice of three orthographic forms. The Botanical Editor of Rees’ “ En- cyclopedia” uses the form employed by Professor Gray in the “Manual,” and does not seem to think that the credit of intro- ducing “several Canadian plants” does him justice, for he gives the following account of him: “Sarracenia was so named by Tournefort, in honor of his friend, Dr. Sarrazin, of Quebec, who collected numerous plants in Canada, specimens of which are still in the Herbarium of the Museum of Natural History at Paris. While they lay there for ages unnoticed, the discovery of the same plants has been attributed to more recent travellers, who, indeed, could know nothing of Dr. S.’s acquisitions.” Having given some account of the origin of its botanical name, we may devote a short space to its common one of “ Side- saddle flower,” by which many of the family, as well as this particular species, are often known. The stigma of the Sarracenia consists of a broad plate; or, rather, there are “five stigmas united into a large peltate persistent membrane, covering the SARRACENIA DRUMMONDII.—DRUMMOND’'S PITCHER-PLANT. 7 ovary and stamens,” as Professor Wood explains it. When the flower is fully expanded and recurved, the petals seem to hang between the up-curved angles of this persistent membrane, which membrane, according to Curtis, in the “ Botanical Maga- zine,’ is “like a side-saddle, the petals hanging out from the angles like a lady’s legs.” Nuttall, however, does not seem to agree with this account, or that “Side-saddle flower” is even an American name. He says: “The most curious plant of the class Polyandria” (the Linnaan system prevailed in that day, and Sarracenia was then referred to this class) “is undoubtedly the peculiar North American genus Sarracenia, termed in Eng- land the Side-saddle flower, or rather leaf, as the resemblance only exists there to the old-fashioned side-saddle.” One would judge from this expression of Nuttall’s that the name of “Side- saddle” flower was not the common one by which it was known in this country, but was given to itin England. Yet this hardly agrees with Gronovius’ “Flora Virginica,” wherein is a note attributed to Clayton, of Virginia, which says,—he is evidently referring to the Sarracema variolarts,— This is commonly called Side-saddle flower; and in North Carolina, the Trumpet flower.” The name of Drummondii was given to this species by Croom, a very promising American botanist, who collected industriously through the Southern States, but whose useful career was cut short by a marine accident; and it is a little remarkable that Drummond, an enthusiastic Scotch collector, the one for whom the plant was named, should also have died at Havana, far away from home and friends, when on a collecting tour. Thus, Croom and Drummond, both in a measure victims to science, happily have their names associated in the history of this beautiful flower. One of the most interesting facts connected with our plant is its fly-catching power, already referred to, which this species has in common with other Savracenzas. There is not only the secre- tion of water in the pitcher-like leaves, but a secretion of sweet liquid is found on the surface, which it is believed is in pursu- 8 SARRACENIA DRUMMONDII.—DRUMMOND’S PITCHER-PLANT. ance of a design of nature to allure insects to destruction. They come for the honeyed juice, which is supposed to intoxicate them, when they fall into the little well of water, are drowned, and then consumed by the plant. “Drummond's Side-saddle flower” has figured particularly in this character. In ‘“Silliman’s Journal,” for 1873, Dr. Gray says: “Sarracenia Drummondi is the species which most closely resembles S. flava in the shape and structure of the pitcher. We now learn from a letter addressed by Dr. Chapman to Mr. Canby, that the former is well aware of a similar (sweet) secretion in that species. ‘On the inside of the hood,’ he writes, ‘there is a very faintly sweetish secretion, scarcely perceptible to the taste, which is very attrac- tive to insects; and as | do not detect any of this within the tube I wonder how it is so many insects are entrapped, since they could easily fly away from the open hood.’” “Drummond’s Side-saddle flower” is found in the seaboard States, from Virginia to Florida. It is a very variable species, and this induced Professor Wood to group a number of varieties under one name—S. Gronovi. Among the variations is one with a pure white pitcher; that is to say, without the colored veining, This is known to florists as Sarracenia Drummondi alba; and as the flower remains of a beautiful red, the contrast is pleasing, and the variety is highly prized in England. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—1. Root-stock with flowers and pitcher-like leaves. 2. Upper section of trumpet-like leaf. 3. Enlarged portion of a wing of the leaf. EN fF H | L LMANNIA PINNA’ 2 \ 7. ENGELMANNIA PINNATIFIDA. CUT-LEAVED ENGELMANN FLOWER. NATURAL ORDER, COMPOSITA. ENGELMANNIA PINNATIFIDA, Torrey and Gray.—A perennial branching, rough and hirsute herb with branching stems, corymbose paniculate at the summit, and bearing several small heads on slender peduncles. Leaves alternate, strigose, oblong or ovate lanceolate, ir- regularly pinnatifid, with the segments lanceolate or linear (the lower longest or divaricate), sessile, the radical petiolate and bipinnatifid. Rays yellow, terdily deciduous, pubescent externally, Heads many-flowered; the ray flowers equal in number to the inner scales of the involucre (eight to ten) and situated in their axils, ligulate, pistillate; involucre in three series, coriaceo-chartaceous, broadly ovate or obovate, appressed, the exterior short- est, all abruptly narrowed into a foliaceous lanceolate or linear spreading appendage, the exterior exceeding the scale itself in length. Receptacle flat; the chaff persistent, char- taceous, with foliaceous and hairy tips, partly involute and enclosing the sterile flowers ; the outer series lanceolate acute, two firmly adherent to the base of each involucral scale; the others very narrowly linear, rather obtuse. Corolla of the ray with an oblong exserted sessile ligule; of the disc dilated upwards, fine-toothed, the teeth somewhat hairy, style in the sterile flowers undivided hispid. Achenia of the ray equal in size to the concave inner involucral scales to which they are applied, oval-obovate, obcompressed, convex and car- inate externally, flat or concave, and one-ridged on the inside, scabrous pubescent, not winged or toothed, crowned with two small scarious lanceolate concave marcescent squa- melle, which are more or less united at the base, hispid and fringed; those of the disc filiform, abortive, with a minute coroniform pappus. (Torrey and Gray’s Flora of North America.) “HEN ‘proposing to ourselves to prepare the present work, it was not our intention to make it botanical in its strictest sense, but that while botanically accurate, it should rather be a work for the whole people. Hence it was decided to give only the characters of the species in full, con- fining the text to those facts in relation to the genera and the orders, which might serve to illustrate some general lesson. By the long quotation we have now given from Torrey and Gray, it might be supposed we had forgotten this original plan, and the ’ may startle some who have long paragraph of “hard words’ (9) 10 ENGELMANNIA PINNATIFIDA.—CUT-LEAVED ENGELMANN FLOWER. not advanced far into botanical technicalities. But the fact is, that even from the popular standpoint, it is a piece of good for- tune that we have been obliged to make this long quotation, as it offers a chance for some popular lessons, not often afforded to us, in relation especially to the structure of composite, or Aster- like plants. In the first place we may say, that Exge/mannia pinnatifida is the only known species of the genus, and as there is no other to compete with it for family honors, no specific characters are given. The generic character includes the specific to some extent, and makes a specific description unnecessary. Hence, what we have given shows how little the description of a species may have to do witha plant's essential character, and this affords a good lesson. But the main one is to note with what accuracy a careful botanist can describe a plant, and then the faithfulness with which a good artist can reproduce an original. Occasionally an artist gets some help in his study from a botanical description, and may be tempted to make his drawing agree therewith when perhaps the plant before him would scarcely warrant it. This may arise from a fear that he may not have seen the parts exactly as they are, or not have had a “typical” form to draw from. In this instance our artist had nothing but the living plant to work by, and it is interesting to note how the details given fit in with the botanical description of the learned authors quoted. The rough and hirsute character of the herb is very well shown, The corymbous character (the flower stalks all coming out nearly together and all about the same length) is seen at Fig. 1. The alternate leaves show at Fig. 2, 2, and they have the exact form and characters described; the root leaf (3) being petiolate or on a stalk, and the upper one (4) being sessile. The manner in which the rays are tardily deciduous is well shown at 5 by the three lingering petals on the faded flower, and the fresh flowers show the number of ray petals as given. How the ray flower is situated in the axils of the inner scales is shown at 6. The three-seried involucre is seen at 7 with the ENGELMANNIA PINNATIFIDA.—CUT-LEAVED ENGELMANN FLOWER. 11 exterior row the shortest, and all abruptly narrowed at 8. The “receptacle flat” (8) shows a slight variation—“flattish” might answer, but scarcely flat. At 9 we have the persistent chaff, foliaceous, and with hairy tip, partly enclosing the sterile flower (10); those adherent to the involucral scale we see at 11. The oblong ligule of the ray floret we have at 12, and the sterile one (10) dilated, that is swelling, upward and fine-toothed. At 13 we have the undivided hispid style. The akene or seed we need not number, but its equal length to the scale on the back, its form, with the one ridge in front, as it is crowned with the fringed scales, are accurately given. By tracing thus how well botanist and artist have done their several parts, we are able at the same time to aid the student, by the references, to a familiarity with the various parts of the flower. The difference between the ray floret (10) and the fertile floret (12) is very striking. The perfect pistil (14) we see is deeply divided into two branches, while in the disc floret the pistil (13) develops no further than to a mere thread incapable of performing any function. The mass of stamens, however, which we see at 15, perfect pollen, and it is from these that the stigmas (14) receive it. Most of the composite plants we have so far had occasion to figure have had fertile disc florets, and the chance to study a case where the facts are reversed will be very interesting to the student. Torrey and Gray, from the work we have quoted, say: “This genus intermediate between Sz/phium and FPartheniun, is dedi- cated to our esteemed correspondent, Dr. George Engelmann, of St. Louis, Missouri, who has for several years assiduously studied the plants of Missouri, Arkansas, etc., and made valu- able contributions to many European collections, as well as to this work.” This was in 1840. Since then Dr. Engelmann has added immensely to his botanical fame, by continuous and valua- ble botanical work. Although a physician in extensive practice, he takes up, between the times spent in professional duties, special and difficult genera, and thoroughly masters them. ‘Thus I2 ENGELMANNIA PINNATIFIDA.—CUT-LEAVED ENGELMANN FLOWER. he is esteemed by the botanical world as its leading authority on American Oaks, Coniferous trees, Agaves, Yucca, Cuscuta, Juncus or the Rushes, Cactacez and many others. He is not a native of this country, but was born at Frankfort-on-the-Main, on the 2d of February, 1809, so that he is now in his seventieth year, and is still actively engaged in his favorite study. He pub- lished his first botanical work in Germany; came to the United States in 1832, when but twenty years of age; and, two years later, settled in St. Louis, where he has ever since remained. No American botanist is more esteemed for his many virtues as well as for his work than Dr. Engelmann, and we are glad that he will be ever remembered in connection with this pretty flower. Nuttall, who collected this plant, thought it was a species of Silphium. No other species but the one we figure has been found, though a marked variety is noted in the account of Lind- heimer’s Texan plants. Dr. Torrey in the Axzals of the New York Lyceum, published in 1820, notices the species as having been collected by Dr. James on the Canadian river. Nuttall and Dr. Leavenworth are credited with collecting it on the Red river, in Arkansas; Drummond found it in Texas; and Marcy’s expedition in the Witchita mountains. For the opportunity of making our drawing we are indebted to the Bussey Institution, where it was growing under the care of Mr. Jackson Dawson, of the Arnold arboretum. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—See text. Vo. IIL Pate 3. DIPLOPAPPUS LINARIIFOLIUS. L.. PRANG & ComMPANY, Boson. DIPLOPAPPUS LINARIIFOLIUS. ~ SANDPAPER STAR-WORT NATURAL ORDER, COMPOSITE. DIPLOPAPPUS LINARIIFOLIUS, Hooker.—Stem straight, roughish; branches one-flowered, fasti- giate; scales imbricate, carinate, as long as the disk; leaves linear, entire, one-veined, mucronate, carinate, rough, rigid, those of the branches recurved. Stems sub-simple, pur- plish, about one foot high. Leaves numerous, obtuse, with a small mucronate point, shining above. Branchlets near the top, leafy, each with one rather large and showy, violet-colored head. (Wood’s Class-Book of Botany. See also Gray’s Manual of Botany . of the Northern United States, and Chapman's /ora of the Southern United States.) Wai LARGE number of the composite or asteraceous plants : of our country have a somewhat coarse foliage or habit of growth, with which the present elegant species is in strik- ing contrast. In some parts of the world, the Cape of Good Hope especially, there are many with such a slender and pleas-. ing habit as this; and indeed a first glance at our species by one familiar with the vegetation of those distant parts of the world would create the impression, in the absence of positive knowledge, that it was an exotic plant. Indeed; there are species of this same genus, Diplopappus, native to the Cape of Good Hope as well as to the United States. These relationships with the Flora of such distant parts of the world are always of great interest to the student of botanical geography. The species, however, are not very numerous there or here. Even allowing for some which may perhaps rightfully belong to other genera, there may not be many over a couple of dozen of species in all. It was originally classed with Asver; and in fact there is very little beyond the general habit and appearance to distinguish it. The “Treasury of Botany” tells us the genus is “very near Aster, and only differing in the nature of the pappus, which is double, the (3) 14 DIPLOPAPPUS LINARIIFOL‘tUS.— SANDPAPER STAR-WORT. outer row of short, stiff bristles, the inner of capillary bristles as long as the disk florets; while in As/ex the pappus is single.” The fact is, this is one of those cases where general appearance suggests differences which science can scarcely find. Very few would take our present species for an Aster when first found. Its general resemblance is with the genus known as Diflopappus, but in this species the student will scarcely find the double pap- pus, the outer row being nearly wanting. In preparing our Fig. 2, it was a point to show this, but it is so very small that without a larger diagram it cannot be seen. Our botanical text-books scarcely give a correct idea of the small size. Dr. Chapman merely says of all the genus, “pappus of capillary bristles in two rows, the outer row much shorter,” with nothing as to the length in this species. Dr. Gray in the “Manual” says the “ outer series ’ is of very short, stiff bristles,’ and “very short bristles” in the “School Botany.” Professor Wood alone comes down to figures, and he tells us that the exterior pappus is “half a line long,” which is one twenty-fourth of an inch. It is a slender character to build a genus on, and which perhaps would not have been thought of in this connection only for the very different habit and appearance of the group from As/er in general, as already noted. Dr. Gray, indeed, classes it as Aster finariifolius in “ School Botany,” though he notes that this is “of the old botanists, but is strictly Diplopappus linarirfolius.” The name Diflopappus is from two Greek words—a7ploos, double, and fapfpus, an old man; the latter name in botany has been given to the usually gray hair-like crown which surmounts the seeds in so many compound flowers, and is especially like a gray head in the well-known Dandelion. In our Tig. 2 we see what is known as the “inner row” of the pappus, almost enclos- ing the floret, as the little flower is called. : As already noted by Dr. Gray, the plant was known as Aséter by the older botanists, and under this name it appears in Ray's Catalogue about the end of the seventeenth century as the “nar- row rosemary-leaved aster of Maryland,” that celebrated author DIPLOPAPPUS LINARITFOLIUS.—SANDPAPER STAR: WORT, 15 having perhaps been made acquainted with it by his correspondent, the Rev. John Bannister. Linnzus knew it as Aster Minaritfoltus, Michaux as Aster rigzdus, and Nuttall included it in his genus Chrysopsis as C. tinarifolia. The genus Diplopappus was founded by Cassini in a paper published in a Paris magazine in the early part of the present century. The genus Aséer is so very large that though the distinction between it and Diplopappus is small, the division, if at all well founded, must be acceptable to students. It will be noted by those fond of accuracy that the common con- struction of the specific name, linariifolius—that is, “leaves like or belonging to the linaria’”—is not according to Latin rules. Linaria should form its genitive linariz=linarizfolius, and we have to acknowledge our ignorance of any valid reason for the orthography in general use. The snecies affords a very pretty botanical lesson in the devel- opment of its axial buds to branches, and these again to flowers. As we see in our plate, no buds grow from the axils of the lower leaves, but gradually a few axillary leaves appear as the stem elongates, until the latter is suddenly suppressed, when the axial growths become stronger, and while some of them never become more than little branches, others go on to complete flowers. The sudden arrest of growth iu the main stem accelerates that of the branchlets, and we can see that it was this sudden stoppage of growth at the apex which gave the graded impulse downwards, and which resulted in the growth of the axial buds. Precisely the same effect is produced in any growing shoot by artificially arresting its growth—that is, by pinching out its terminal bud. We know that these sudden arrests or sudden accelerations of growth are the foundation of many wonderful changes in the forms of flowers and the general characters of plants; but atten- tion having but recently been drawn to these simple facts, the laws which induce these rythmic growths are not yet understood. Besides furnishing a valuable lesson in Lotany, it is a beautiful plant; and those who grow it in gardens generally esteem it highly on this account. It is one of the last of floral charms to 16 DIPLOPAPPUS LINARIIFOLIUS. —SANDPAPER STAR-WORT, leave us, the seeds being scarcely mature in Pennsylvania by the time the severe frosts come. The height of its season in that ' State is October, though it commences to flower in September. Prof. Wood places it a month earlier than this. It is generally found in dry, hilly, rather open woods, from Canada to Florida, along the Atlantic coast; but it lessens its northern range as it proceeds west, and is not found on the other side of the Missouri or Mississippi. It is more favored than many of its allies in being of some use to man in other ways beside its beauty, for in South Carolina, where it is rather abundant, the leaves are used as a substitute for sandpaper in polishing horn. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—I. Branch from several that formea a tow cushy p.ant. 2. Magnified disk floret. PLATE 4. Vo . Ill At yy f YY ONOCLBA SENSIBILIS. L. PRANG & COMPANY ONOCLEA SENSIBILIS. SENSITIVE FERN. NATURAL ORDER, FILICES. ONOCLEA SENSIBILIS, Linnzeus.—Sterile fronds oblong-triangular; pinnz lanceolate,—the lower ones distinct, pinnatifid-dentate,—the upper confluent, repand-dentate, or entire. Sterile frond six to fifteen inches long, and five to twelve inches wide at the base; lower pinnze three to six inches long; stipe six to ten inches long, slender, angular, naked. Fertile fronds four to eight or ten inches long; pinnz one to three inches long, nearly erect; pin- nules triangular-globose, smoothish, dark brown, resembling berries in two-rowed unilat- eral spikes; stipes eight to twelve inches long, rather stout, terete, naked. (Darlington’s Flora Cestrica. See also Gray’s Flora of the Northern United States, Chapman’s Flora of the Southern United States, Wood's Class-Book of Botany, and Williamson’s Ferns of Kentucky.) #§OST intelligent persons know that according to the mod- ern discoveries in geology, plants existed on the earth ages before man made his appearance thereon; and that in regard to the plants themselves, numerous races have lived and died of which we know nothing now beyond a few traces here and there of a few species which have been preserved to us in the shape of fossil remains. As to the manner of the appear- ance and disappearance of these races, as the ages followed each other in due course, there are differences of opinion. Some believe that the newer forms have been evolved from the older ones by slow and almost imperceptible degrees. We find, in our time, by closely watching seedling plants, that no two are exact reproductions of their parents, or exactly like each other; and if we are not disposed to think that these variations revolve in a circle, but are continuously in a direct line, it will not be dif- ficult to believe that the accumulation of small differences may in time present a structure very different from what we may imagine the first parent to have been. In this way those who (17) 18 ONOCLEA SENSIBILIS.— SENSITIVE FERN. are known as Evolutionists account for the great variations between living forms and those which existed in the earlier geologic ages. There are other scientific men who regard these differences between the early and recent floras as the result of sudden geologic or cosmic catastrophes, destroying existing forms, and almost contemporaneously succeeding with new ones; and who believe that if any did not happen to come wholly within the range of these great disturbing influences, there would be no reason why a form might not continue without material change for countless ages. These geological discussions have a peculiar interest in con- nection with our present subject, the Sensitive Fern, for its remains are found in some very old geological formations in which vegetable remains exist, and precisely in the form in which we find it now. According to Professor Dawson, of Montreal, it was in existence near the Cretacean age, or that time in the earth’s history when only reptiles crawled over the surface, and the mammalian or sucking animals had not yet appeared. In Dr. Dawson’s own language, in his address to the Natural History section of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, delivered at Detroit in 1875, he says: “In a collection of fossil plants from what may be termed beds of transition from the Cretaceous to the Tertiary, I find among other modern species two recent ferns most curiously associated. One is the common Onoclea sensibilis, found now very widely over North America, and which in the so-called mio- cene times (about the middle of the mammalian era preceding man) lived in Europe also. The other is Davatlha tennifolia,.. . still abundant on the other side of the Pacific (and Dr. Dawson might have added, still growing with the Oxoclea there). These little ferns are thus probably older than the Rocky Mountains and the Himalayas, and reach back to a time when Mesozoic Dinosaurs were becoming extinct, and the earliest Placental mammals being introduced. Shall we say that these two ferns, and along with them our two species of Hazel and many other ONOCLEA SENSIBILIS.—SENSITIVE FERN. 19 familiar plants, have propagated themselves unchanged for half a million years?” It is impossible to look on this beautiful fern without a species of veneration for its wonderful antiquity. Some have thought, however, that it shows some disposition to change, and have named one supposed variation— O. od/usilobata. But even this has been ascertained in modern times to be only a phase of development in the transformation of the frond to the reproductive condition, for the mass of fruit (Fig. 3) is nothing but the frond (Fig. 2) in a very much changed state. If we take any fern, say the common Polypody, we shall see that the first leaves are barren, that is, have no fruit dots on their under sur- faces, while others are completely covered with sori or fruit dots. Still there is a general resemblance between the fertile fronds and the fronds with sori on them. But in the case of our sensi- tive fern, the portions of the frond on which the fruit dots are placed have rolled backwards and completely enveloped the mass of sori, giving to this fruiting “frond” the appearance of a cluster of “berries,” as Dr. Darlington expresses it. Now, the variety obtusilobata is simply a frond in an imperfectly developed fertile condition. There are fewer sori on the frond than in the form we generally see, and the lobes do not recurve very much, but retain a good portion of the regular frondose condition. This form is not unfrequently met with, and is very welcome to the young student as giving the key to the structure of the more advanced fruiting frond. The manner in which this fertile frond succeeds the barren one will be found particularly interesting to the close observer. Fig. 4 is a portion of the rhizoma or underground stem taken in early _winter. The first leaves of the season come out in a nearly simultaneous pair, Figs. 5, 5, and seem attached to the side of the rhizoma like a pair of grasshopper legs. After this effort others are produced which never reach a condition beyond long, slender scales, Figs. 7, 7. About the middle of summer another single one is formed which becomes the fertile “frond,” Fig. 3, and which proceeded from Fig. 6. Then a few more scales are 20 ONOCLEA SENSIBILIS.—SENSITIVE FERN. produced, and finally, at the end of the season’s growth, the young, circinately arranged leaves which are to push out again into barren fronds on the advent of spring. Modern botanists have been puzzled to account for its name sensibilis, or sensitive fern. Linnzeus simply found it in use when he established the binomial system, and retained what he found. Thomas Moore, an authority on ferns, says it “has no other claim to this name beyond the fact of its rapidly withering when cut.” Mr. Robinson in his “Ferns of Essex Co., Mass.,” has a similar idea, only that the cutting is by frost. He has noted, as the writer of this has, that the slightest white frost injures the fronds; but, after all, frost has this effect on many other of our hardy ferns, and one cannot but wonder why this one more than others should have be en singled out as especially “sensitive” on that account. Rafinesque, in his “ Medical Flora,” published in 1828, at page 67, says that the fronds of Oxoclea sensibilis are “sensible to a harsh grasp,” which “coils them when plucked;” but this seems to be rather a translation of what Linnzus wrote of it than to be an cbservation of his own. How far coiling may have sug- gested its generic name, Ovoclea, is not clear. The text-books tell us it is “from ovos, a vessel, and lero, to enclose,” but no one can exactly see the application. One tells us it is “an ancient name of Dioscorides,” but the old Greek writer’s plant seems to have had something in connection with the ass, and to have been perhaps an Azchusa or some Loraginaccous plant. At any rate, whatever may have been the original meaning or derivation of the mame, we can only know that our plant had no relation whatever to anything the Greeks or Romans had in their mind. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—1. Rhizome. 2. Barren frond. 3. Fertile frond. 4. Fibrous roots from the rhizome. 5. Bases of the barren fronds. 6, Base of the fertile frond. 7. Abortive fronds or scales. Sul. PLATE ©, Ws SARRACENIA PSI Jus ark eer Ra : PTAC NA CGOhIBANY. mt SARRACENIA PSITTACINA. PARROT-HEADED PITCHER-PLANT. NATURAL ORDER, SARRACENIACE/E, SARRACENIA PSITTACINA, Michaux.—Leaves short, spreading; tube slender, broadly winged, marked with white spots, and reticulated with purple veins; lamina globose, inflated, incurved-beaked, almost closing the orifice of the tube; leaves two to four inches long; scapes one foot high. (Chapman’s Flora of the Southern United States. See also Wood’s Class- Book of Botany.) HE careful reader will notice that in Professor Wood’s be “Class-Book” (Ed. 1861, before us) the name of this plait i is given as S. pszticina, but this is evidently one of those typographical errors which even the most careful editor will sometimes overlook. Dr. Chapman has it S. Psittacina, begin- ning the specific name with a capital; and as_ typographical errors are rare in this work, we might conclude that it is no error of the press, but that Dr. Chapman intended it to read this way. There appears, however, to be no reason why it should be so; and we have changed it in the botanical quotation made from his work. This may seem a small matter to some, but as our work is intended for the novices in botanical studies as well as for those who are more accomplished, we take the occasion to explain why capitals are sometimes used in the specific name. Generic names are always commenced with a capital; specific ones only when derived from proper names. Thus Sarracenia vubra claims a capital only for the generic name; 7zéra, or red, being a common and nota proper name, does not require it. There are two capitals in S. Drammondit, the last word meaning of or belonging to Mr. Drummond. Sometimes however a name which, under some circumstances, may have been a generic (21) 22 SARRACENIA PSITTACINA.—PARROT-HEADED PITCHER-PLANT. one, becomes merely that of a species, in which case, though it might have been derived originally from a common name, it fol- lows its “proper” form. Now fscé¢acus is Latin for a parrot, and a botanist might make a genus under a name derived from this word. In time it might be moved to Sarracenia, when in order to carry along its ancient history it would be called Sarracenia Puttacina, But it does not appear that this has ever been the case with our present plant, and therefore under the rules the capital should be avoided. Indeed our present species was not known to the earlier botanists; S. flava and S. purpurea being the only two that seem to be referred to in Clayton’s collection. Michaux, who gave it the name of Astttacina, was nearly the first to notice it as being particularly distinct from others, though it was supposed to be a form of S. rubra, when taken to England by Frazer in 1786. The earlier botanists seem to have had much difficulty in distin- guishing it from S. 7wéra ; and Croom made a new species of one form under the name of S. fzlchella, which is now however referred to S. pstttacina. Croom himself was the first to identify it. In“ Suilliman’s Journal” for 1834, he says: “Ever since I met with the species of Sarracenia of which I gave some account in this journal for October last, under the name of S. pzlchella, I have felt a suspicion that it is the true original of Michaux’ S. psittacina, which later botanists have united with S. radra of Walter, but from which this species is very distinct, and forming an apparently intermediate species between S. variolarts and S. rubra, .. . As I have before remarked, the appendix of this species resembles the head of a parrot, and it is the only spe- cies in which the resemblance is striking. The leaves too are shorter than those of either of those of the other species, and therefore particularly deserving the application of the word ‘brevibus ;’ while those of S. rwdra,so far as my observation has extended, are as long as, and even longer than S\ veszolaris. The white spots in the leaves, which I have mentioned, may be what Michaux meant by the term ‘coloratis,’ while their purple SARRACENIA PSITTACINA.—PARROT-HEADED PITCHER-PLANT. 2 3 veins (which I omitted to mention) are well expressed by venoso-reticulatis, In my former account the description which I gave of the longitudinal wing is faulty. Instead of lanceolate, the term semi-lanceolate would have better conveyed the idea I intended—broad above, narrowing to a point below.” We give this little piece of history from Croom, in order that moderns may see what difficulties the early botanists had in searching for the facts, and how thankful we may be that their labors have made matters so clear and plain for us. That the plant is variable we can well imagine after reading what Croom and Chapman say, and comparing it with our plate, which is a faithful copy of one growing in the Cambridge Botanical Garden, which has not the white spots nor purple veins. The leaves in our plate are however very young, as this species flowers among the earliest, and while the new growth is being made. Mr. A. P. Garber says, in the “ Botan- ical Gazette, in Florida, on the 16th of February. The broad wing of the leaf in the Parrot pitcher-plant, as ” that he has seen it nearly in flower at Pilatka, referred to by the botanical authorities, is one of the most striking features of this species. As will be seen by our plate the leaf is nearly all wing, and there is scarcely a tubular portion enough left to warrant us in calling it a pitcher at all. As our readers know, the pitchers in Savracenza have been supposed to be special contrivances to catch insects to aid in nourishing the plant. Mr. Nuttall scouted this idea. He says: “The tubes are commonly crowded with dead flies and other insects, perish- ing in imprisonment by one of the wonderful but simple acci- dents of nature,—a lesson for the incautious,—but no proof of instinct or necessity in the passive Sarracenia, which could probably well maintain its vegetation without the aid of dead insects—a remark equally applicable to many other plants which accidentally prove fatal to insects, such as the wonderful Dionea, which in its native swamps as frequently catches straws as flies, and will equally enfold anything, so subject is it in this 24 SARRACENIA PSITTACINA.—PARROT-HEADED PITCHER-PLANT. respect to the blindness of accident.” It is not our purpose to enter into any controversial questions in this work, but to give enough of facts on all sides to enable the student to form judg- ments for himself. Without therefore saying that the Pitcher- plants are designed expressly to catch and use insects as food, we may remark that Mr. Nuttall’s argument does not prove that they are not, for nature evidently loves to do any one thing ina great variety of ways. It may even be questioned whether the pitcher-leaved Sarracenias could maintain their vegetation quite as well without the water and insects. It is interesting to note how little leaf surface there is to act asin other plants. Scarcely anything is left but the pitcher's lid capable of absorbing matter from the atmosphere. Nature indeed seems to look on the pitcher as a substitute for leaf surface. In our present species, which has no insect-catching pitchers worth speaking of, she seems to have thought it necessary to compensate for this absence in the broad green wing, which is indeed the leaf of S an ordinary plant in all that relates to general functional power. Having no pitcher, it had to have leaves. Arguments of this kind are not however what the best botanists accept. Instead of looking exclusively to what a plant may do by evident ability from adaptation, what it actually does do is the safer field for investigation, - The Parrot pitcher-plant is confined to a small strip of our great country, between Louisiana and Florida to Georgia. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—1I. Flowering plant with the newly pushing leaves. 2. The broad wing. 3. Old leaf (of previous year), showing close resemblance to a parrot head. 4. Cut-off portion, showing the very narrow tube. 5. Showing the “ five-cleft, umbrella style’? of Dr. Chapman. LILIUM CANADENSE. AMERICAN YELLOW LILY. NATURAL ORDER, LILIACEA. Litium CANADENSE, Linneeus.—Leaves three-veined, mostly verticillate, lanceolate, the veins hairy beneath; peduncles terminal, elongated, usually by threes; flowers nodding, the segments spreading, never revolute. Buib scaly. Stem round, two to four feet high, surrounded by several remote whorls, each consisting of four to six leaves, and often a few scattered ones at the base. These are two to three inches long by the half to one inch wide. Flowers one to three, sometimes seven to twenty, pendulous, yellow, or orange- colored, spotted with dark purple inside. (Wood’s Class-Book of Botany. See also Gray’s Botany of the Northern United States, and Chapman’s Flora of the Southern Tnited States.) gO NCEELLOW. in his beautiful poem of “Flowers,” _ 1 oO =a] sings of “ Gorgeous flowerets in the sunlight shining, Blossoms flaunting in the eye of day.” He may have had a sunflower in his mind, or it may have been many another flower; but there are few things “in the sunlight shining,” and flaunting their “blossoms in the eye of day” more gorgeously than the various species of our native lilies. Indeed the Lily is ever beautiful, is famed for its loveliness in all parts of the world, and has been celebrated in song and story in all ages. Its very name is contemporaneous with history, having been used by Homer; and its literal meaning is “the most charming of all flowers.” The ancients imagined that the red Lily was the first to be created, and modern authors believe that the martagon Lily is the species they referred to. The Latin writers speak of it as “Lilium intortum;” and as the martagon turns its petals very much back upon itself, it seems to agree so far with their description. As is the case with most of the (25) L 20 LILIUM CANADENSE.—AMERICAN YELLOW LILY. flowers which they highly esteemed, they gave to the red Lily a miraculous origin. It is said that a very excellent young god- dess, Sylvia, who was as fair as she was good, had but a poor opinion of Jupiter, who paid his addresses to her. Jupiter was not accustomed to such rebuffs, and treated the fair lady rather roughly; but she was so shocked at such rudeness, that her nose suddenly took to bleeding, and from a few drops which fell to the ground the red Lily sprung. The white Lily is said to be a later creation, and to have sprung from the milk of Juno, and, we are sorry to say, when she was in a somewhat intoxicated condition from imbibing too freely of nectar. Considering the more respectable origin of the red Lily, it seems scarcely just that most of the best Lily-poetry has been given to the white; and that the white Lily, not satisfied with what may be fairly her due, has taken some that belongs of right to her darker sister: for the Lily which Solomon in all his glory could not compete with.was much more probably of the red than the white kind. If we are asked to “ Bring Lilies for a maiden’s grave,” or if, on Percival’s invitation, we go to “a sweet green spot Where a Lily is blooming fair,” or, with Keats, to look at one “who grew Like a pale flower by some sad maiden cherished,” or to see the “Lady lily gently looking down,” or in fact to imagine any poetic Lily whatever, the chance is that we shall be called on to go where the “Queen of the field, in a milk-white mantle drest, The lovely Lily waved her curling crest.” It is, however, some satisfaction to feel after all this poetic ~ slight of the old world on fair Sylvia’s devotion to womanly LILIUM CANADENSE.— AMERICAN YELLOW LILY. 27 decorum, that the new world may fully atone for the injustice, for of the numerous species indigenous to America, there is not one white among them all. Our present species, Lilia Canadense, or American yellow Lily, we believe to be the earliest of all our native species to flower; for though it is not so stated in our text-books, it is not unusual to find it in bloom in the vicinity of Philadelphia the last of May or very early in June. This season (1878) particularly it was noted that not a single flower could be obtained on the 20th of June, all being over blown by that time. The flowers vary very much in color from deep yellow to a rich crimson in different plants. Much remains yet to be learned of Lilies, and especially of this species. There is a form of it from Mississippi which commences to flower just as the form from New Jersey goes out of bloom, and which produces no seeds. The flowers also are of a richer color, and more revolute than Wood's description would imply. Further it will amply repay the student to watch the behavior of the flowers when about to seed. When the flower first opens it hangs on its sub-erect stem, the pistil curving but little upwards. It makes no growth whatever for several days, or until the petals begin to fade,—then the pistil takes an upward curve, sometimes so much as to have its apex pointing towards the ovary. For several days after this the ovary or pistil remains stationary, when at length the formsr assumes a straight line with the pedicel, and finally erect, in which position the seed vessel matures. We thus see that growth in nature is not by regular advances; but is by leaps, or as we say, rhythmical. There is a great general resemblance between the species of lilies, and it is not easy to distinguish one from another. The yellow Lily approaches the Z. saferdum, but is generally out of flower before that commences to open; the divisions of the peri- anth or flower cup as a general rule do not turn back quite so much,—but a good distinction lies in the terminal character of the flowers in the best specimens of our species; that is, the flowers seem to come out in a bunch or cluster at the top of the 28 LILIUM CANADENSE.—AMERICAN YELLOW LILY. stalk as shown in our plate (Fig. 1), while in the best specimens of L. superbum the flowers are more or less axillary as well as terminal, though in poor specimens of the latter when there are but two or three flowers on the stalk, they are only terminal, as in L. Canadense. The Lily increases by underground stems. These, very much arrested in their development, form the bulb, as may be seen by the great number of small scales, each of which is the represent- - ative of a leaf. As three of these leaves would make a circle round the stem if alternately scattered as they are on many allied plants, we may have some idea from the number of these little scales how long the lily stem would be if accelerated instead of arrested as the stems or branches of ordinary plants are. As we see in our Figs. 2 and 3, the rhizoma or underground stem pushes out from the base of the last year’s bulb (Fig. 2), gradu- ally thickening as it approaches the end of its season of growth. The new bulb (Fig. 3) in the case illustrated is much larger than its predecessor, and will make a stronger flower stem next year. The yellow Lily is found in all portions of the United States east of the Mississippi, and in Arkansas and Minnesota, skipping Kansas. Some closely allied forms are also found on the Pacific slope, but botanists are not yet agreed as to whether they are really distinct species or forms of this one. It is usually found in wet, open meadows, but as we go southwardly it is found only at the higher elevations, showing that its real home centre is towards the north. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—1I. Top of an averaged-sized flower stem, from Massachusetts. 2. The flowering bulb. 3. New bulb for flowering the next year. SoLANUM ToRRE—— SOLANUM TORREYI. TORREY’'S SOLANUM. NATURAL ORDER, SOLANACE-E. SOLANUM TorREYI, Gray.—Cinereous with a somewhat close furfuraceous pubescence composed of about equally nine to twelve-rayed hairs: prickles small and subuiate, scanty along the stem and midribs, or sometimes nearly wanting: leaves ovate with truncate or slightly cordate base, sinuately five to seven-lobed (four to six inches long); the lobes entire or undulate, obtuse, unarmed: cymes at first terminal, loose, bifid or trifid; lobes of the calyx (often six) short ovate with a long abrupt acumination. Corolla an inch anda half in diameter; its lobes broadly ovate: berry globose, an inch in diameter, yellow when mature. (Dr. Asa Gray in Synoptical Flora of North America.) HIS beautiful species of Solanum has a very brief botan- “yi ical history. It appears to have been met with es Tindheimer in Texas in 1843, “around Houston, the Brazos, etc.” and is noted in an account of his collections by Engelmann and Gray in 1845. It was then not well understood, and referred doubtfully to an old Linnzean species, a native of the West Indies, named Solanum mammosum, and some comparison made be- tween it and the Solanum Caroliniense, the well-known “ Horse- Nettle,” so troublesome to cultivators in many parts of the Union. that one described as S. platyphyllum by Dr. Torrey is to be regarded as this species; the S. platvphylum described by Humboldt, Bonpland and Kunth from South America being something else. Torrey’s name d Dr. Gray also notes in the “Synopsis” t being therefore appropriated by another, according to botanical rules the plant has to be renamed, and thus we find it now, as given by Dr. Gray, S. Zorreyz. This is all that we find noted of it in botanical works. Its geographical history is as brief. Dr. Gray says it grows on “ Prairies, etc—in Kansas and Texas.” It is not however in the catalogue of Kansas plants recently issued (20) 30 SOLANUM TORREYI.—TORREY'S SOLANUM. by Professor Snow, and is probably rare in that State. Indeed from the fact that while so many collectors have been over both the States named in different directions it does not appear in their lists, it is probable that it is not a common species. If this be so it is remarkable, as the plant increases from creeping under-ground stems; or at least every portion of its roots, when - broken, will push out and make a plant, in this respect much resembling the “ Horse-Nettle” before referred to, and which is so great a pest that in Delaware the writer has known cultivated ground abandoned on account of its existence. It is well to take particular notice of this power of growth possessed by the roots, as from its beauty it will probably be sought for by culti- vators, and may become very troublesome unless this character be well known. To those who understand it little trouble need arise from its culture, for its neighbor, the “ Horse-Nettle,” is easily kept within bounds by a little watchfulness. A case came under the writer’s notice where the “ Horse-Nettle” had estab- lished itself profusely before it was observed, but on its discov- ery a boy was set to dig the roots out carefully. Broken por- tions left in the earth grew, and these were again taken out. This was repeated three times during the season, and it was believed that all were destroyed; but on closely watching, a few plants were found the next year, and were also taken out, and no more appeared any time afterwards. This was ona large scale, and of course entailed great labor, but a very little care would be sufficient to keep a single plant within bounds under garden culture. Its beauty well deserves any little attention that may be required in cultivating it. Torrey’s Solanum, while it has not much history of its own to boast of, belongs to a very celebrated genus. In numbers they are enormous, Don, in his “Dictionary of Gardening,” pub- lished in 1838, numbers 406 of them, without including the Tomato-like species and others which were regarded as Solanuims by Linnzeus. Decandolle in his “ Prodromus” gives nine hundred and twenty species! So that a critical study of this genus is SOLANUM TORREYI,—TORREY’S SOLANUM, 31 almost enough for one man. It is also interesting to note that the greater part of these are natives of the American Continent. They mostly love heat, however, and few species are found able to endure the winter of the United States. Dr. Gray has less than twenty species in his “Synopsis,” and some of these are doubtfully native. The name Solanum is a very ancient one, and no one now seems to know to what plant it was originally applied, or why the name was given to whatever plant it may have been. Don says it is “a name given by Pliny, but the derivation is uncer- tain. Some derive it from So/, the sun; others say it is Solanum, from Sus, being serviceable in disorders of swine; and others from So/or, to comfort, from its soothing narcotic effects: all these conjectures are, however, improbable.” Some botanists have adopted one, some another of these conjectures, but Dr. Gray decides the “derivation uncertain.” It may be noted however that the first and last suggestions given by Don are probably the same, as So/or and So/ are evidently from the same root. The Latin poet Virgil evidently uses the word So/ in the application to clear soothing weather, and the transition in this relation to our word solace is evident enough. Ainsworth in his dictionary says positively Solanum is a@ sole, which is Latin signifying from the Sun. All that is certainly known is that by the name the old Greeks and Romans had in view some sooth- ing or narcotic plant, and what were known as “ Nightshades,” during the Middle Ages, or at least as far back as we can trace botanical knowledge, were associated with So/anum. Tourne- fort, about the year 1700, limited the genus as we now have it, and Linnzus adopted the name in his “Genera Plantarum,” Oe rae a Associated as So/anum was with the “ Nightshades” in which is the celebrated Atyopa Belladonna, the whole family of Solanum was at one time looked on with suspicion. The potato and, for the popular purpose we have now in view, the egg-plant and tomato, all near enough to the genus to be at one time consid- 32 SOLANUM TORREYI.—TORREY’S SOLANUM. ered by good botanists members of it, were supposed to be in some measure poisonous. The tubers of the potato were thought to be safe only after they were cooked; and even within the memory of the present writer few persons thought it quite safe to eat a raw tomato. The immense quantities of tomatoes eaten uncooked in our time would have astonished our forefathers. It is not however clear how far they are poisonous. Griffith, in his “Medical Botany,” says the leaves of the tomato will produce vomiting; and other medical writers tell us that the “balls,” or seed-vessels of the potato, eaten have caused certain death. But who would make the trial, for these potato fruits are very nauseous, and have nothing to attract even a child? The Solanunze mammosum, with which our species was once associated, and to which it is closely allied, is said by Ainslee to bear “a large and poisonous fruit.” We give all this as part of the associated history, but have an impression that our pretty flowering species, S. Zorreyz, will not be found such a very bad fellow after all. Of late years much attention has been given to the study of the hairs of plants. They often exhibit a great variety in form and structure, and as in S. Zorrey? the hairs are particularly referred to by Dr. Gray in the description quoted from _ his work, we have given an enlarged drawing of one which in this case is branched, or in botanical language, stellate. There seemed to be none “eight to twelve rayed” on our plant, as Dr. Gray finds in his specimens. All were uniformly seven rayed, as in our very much magnified engraving (Fig. 2), which is given as a back view showing a small pedicel to which the rays are attached. For the opportunity of illustrating this rare and pretty spe- cies we are indebted to the Cambridge Botanical Garden, where it was growing to perfection under the care of Mr. W. Falconer, gardener there. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—1. A flowering branch. 2. Stellate hair enlarged from the under-side of a leaf. banc” NU Al Ge spt ah cae POLYPODIUM CALIFORNICUM. CALIFORNIAN POLYPODY. NATURAL ORDER, FILICES. POLYPODIUM CALIFORNICUM, Kaulfuss.—Fronds deeply pinnatifid; segments oblong, retuse, sharply serrate, the inferior ones narrower towards the base, decurrent; veins oblique parallel; veinlets dichotomous, anastomosing; sori ovate, solitary. (Kaulfuss 72 E£nu- meratio Lilicum quas in itinere circa terram legit cl. Adelbertus de Chamisso, etc.) S none of our popular botanical text-books contain any 4| description of this pretty fern, we have translated the original description of the species as given by Dr. Frederick Kaulfuss in the work above referred to. Chamisso accompa- nied the navigator Kotzebue in his celebrated voyage ; and Kaul- fuss, who was professor of botany in the celebrated German University of Halle, described and remarked on the ferns his friend collected. According to Kaulfuss, Chamisso simply gives “California” as its location, but it is found much farther north, as specimens from which our drawing was made were gathered for us near the Falls of the Wilhamette by Mrs. Fanny E. Briggs, who thus graphically descrites the spot from whence they came: “Oregon City, one of the oldest towns in the State, is the most picturesque in situation I have yet met with. Here are the Falls of the Wilhamette, and a line of high rocky bluffs rise abruptly, leaving only a narrow strip of level ground along the river. The railroad is built on this. The town is wholly on the bluffs, and is reached by long flights of stairs, some of the steps set zigzag in upright frames. The town is neat and pretty, with gardens, shade and fruit trees in abundance. The rocky face of the bluff is covered by mosses, ferns and vines, and two or three little silver ribbon-like mountain streams leap sparklingly 3 (33) 34 POLYPODIUM CALIFORNICUM.—CALIFORNIAN POLYPODY. from its rocky brow.” We are very glad to be able to give a representation of this very beautiful fern, because in pursuance of our plan to take representatives of the Flora from every part of the United States we want to have Oregon represented; and also because this species offers the opportunity to say a little on the importance of examining the veins in determining the various kinds of ferns. The earlier botanists paid attention chiefly to the form of the fruit dots, their position on the fronds, or their situation on the veins; but characters derived from the veins themselves do not appear to have attracted much attention till a comparatively modern date. In 1836 Professor C. B. Presl, one of two brothers both celebrated botanists of Prague, pub- lished a work on ferns in which characters drawn from the veins occupied a very prominent position. Those who make ferns a special study do not seem to agree in all cases with Professor Presl as to the precise value of such characters, but still they are found generally to be of as much value as most other characters in ferns, and hence all students in these times examine the veins as closely as any other parts of a fern. Some veins are simple, others branched, others run completely to the margin, while others stop short. Again there are others which continually diverge, and no matter what may be their length never touch another after having once started from the parent vein; while there are others which seem to run backwards and forwards, connecting one with another, and forming a complete net-work all over the surface. In some cases these characters are constant, that is to say, are generally found the same in all the specimens of the, species we may find, and then they form what botanists call a valuable character; but in other cases they are found to vary, sometimes having perhaps free veins, that is never being connected at their points, and at others they forma net-work, or as it is technically said, they anastomose. Our present species is just one of these uncertain cases. It will be noted that the description translated from Kaulfuss says “veinlets anastomosing,” but these will not be found in that POLYPODIUM CALIFORNICUM.—CALIFORNIAN POCLYPODY. 35 condition on our plate. The reason is that about the time when our species was first discovered the condition of the veins was supposed to be more unchangeable than it is known to be now. In some places a form was found like it that did not have the netted veins, and it was thought therefore to be another species, and named by Hooker and Arnott Polyfodtum intermedium ; but as more specimens were discovered some of the former would occasionally be found with free veins and some of the latter with netted veins, and therefore in this case at least the character is worth nothing as a distinction. Consequently Hooker, in his “Species Filicum” published in 1864, united the two, and they are now both known by the oldest name P. Californicum. Our plant in its earlier history would have been probably known as FP. intermediun. Whether a form is to be considered as a distinct species or as a mere variety depends very much on experience as to the fixity of characters, rather than on any specific points that can be readily explained; and we can see in this case that only for the fact that a few netted veins had been found in one case, and a few free veins in another case, both forms would in all probability be regarded as distinct species to this day; and it is such facts as these which make observations on the range of variation in species of so much value to practical botanists. In ferns espe- cially very much has to be learned on this point. For want of this knowledge synonyms are very numerous. In the case of our present species, Professor Kunze, in a paper translated in « Silliman’s Journal,” new series, Vol. 6th, remarks that Hooker and Greville, standard authors on ferns, had united very differ- ent species with it. Another writer in the 6th Volume of the “Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club” suggests a doubt whether another species of the Pacific Coast, Polypodium falca- tum, may not be referred to P. Calfornicum. Botanists may not be wholly prepared for this view yet, although we incline to it; but it shows how uncertain much fern knowledge yet remains, A very pretty feature in our Californian Polypody is its trans- 36 POLYPODIUM CALIFORNICUM.—CALIFORNIAN POLYPODY. parent veins as seen when held up to the light. These veins are club-shaped, or thickened upwards at the termination, a point that does not seem to have attracted the attention of describers, though as to the mere frond differences in the opacity of the various forms have been commented on. Kaulfuss in the work from which we have translated the description says it is “similar to Polypodium vulgare,” which is our common Eastern form. But this is from the botanist’s stand- point. The popular vote will be that it is much handsomer, by its more slender lobes and generally graceful fronds. If we, as it seems we must, combine P. zxéermedium with P.. Californicum, it gives a wide geographical range to it on the Pacific Coast from the Columbia River southwards. EXPLANATION OF THE PLATE.—1I. An average sized plant. 2. An enlarged portion of a division of the frond showing the veinlets and the sori thereon. Vor. Ul ATE. 9. ifs ve SARRACENIA RUBRA. L. Prana &« Company, Bosto Gabe os . : SARRACENIA RUBRA. RED-FLOWERED TRUMPET LEAF.—Watrer’s SARRACENIA. NATURAL ORDER, SARRACENIACE. SARRACENIA RUBRA, Walter.—Leaves elongated, erect, slender, narrowly winged, paler above, and reticulated with purple veins; lamina ovate, erect, beak-pointed, tomentose within; flowers reddish purple. Leaves ten to eighteen inches long, shorter than the scapes. (Chapman’s Flora of the Southern United States. See also Wood's Class- Book of Botany, under S. Gronovi?.) HIS species of the “Side-saddle flower” well illustrates a Z4A/ point often made, that names may be misleading, and fist names which have no particular meaning so far as the appli- cation to any character in the plant is concerned, are at least as good as any. This particular species was named by Thomas Walter, who published a history of the plants of the Carolinas in 1788. As Sarracenia rubra, it is the red-flowered Sarracenia, naturally enough from Walter's name; but there are other Sar- racenias as “red” as this, and the collector of wild flowers must therefore remember when he reads of the “Red Sarracenia,” that it is merely “its name.” Still, as it is just as well to avoid mis- leading names, we propose to those who may wish a better name than the only one so far known for it, that it be called ‘Walter's Sarracenia.” The Sarracenias are so unlike most other plants, that the student is particularly interested in how they are made, and the especial reasons for their peculiar structure. While, as Percival says, generally “Tn flowers The serpent hides his venom, and the sting Of the dread insect lurks in fairest bowers,” the case is reversed here. There is no lurking of dread insects (37) 38 SARRACENIA RUBRA.—RED-FLOWERED TRUMPET LEAF. about these flowers. It is the plant which acts like the “veno- mous serpent,” and entices the “lurking insect” to its sure destruction. How they work to this end is very curious. In “Silliman’s Journal” for 1873, Professor Gray quotes from the English translation of Maout and Decaisnes’ “System of Botany:” “The pitcher-shaped leaves are effective insect traps; a sugary secretion exudes at the mouth of the pitchers and attracts insects, which descend lower in the tube, where they meet with a belt of reflexed hairs, which facilitate their descent into a watery fluid that fills the bottom of the cavity, and at the same time prevents their egress.” This is given as of our present plant, S. zadra, but as Canada is mentioned, Dr. Gray thinks it must have had reference to S. pupurca, which is the only one found in Canada. Dr. Gray says he wishes “to call attention to the statement that Sarracenia produces a sugary excretion which attracts flies to their ruin, this being the first time, so far as I know, that any such statement has app:ared in print.” However, it appears in print in American publications long before this. In Darby's “Botany of the Southern States,” written in 1855, we read at page 219: “This genus affords a striking example of a great modification of the petiole, since there is no doubt the tube part is the petiole, and what we call the lamina, the true lamina of the leaf. These tubes are generally filled with water, which is sup- posed to be secreted by the plart, and this always contains dead insects. The tube could not have been formed in a better man- ner to accomplish a given end than this is to catch insects. The saccharine secretion which surrounds the orifice decoys insects to the tube, and the water entices them in. There are hairs pointing downwards so as to permit an easy descent, but makes the egress difficult.” As before noted, it is not certain that our present species, the red or Walter’s Sarracenia, has this power of excreting honeyed matter; so we give what ts said of it in full, that collectors may be on the lookout to verify the statement for themselves, As for the fact that the pitcher is the petiole, and that it has SARRACENIA RUBRA.—RED-FLOWERED TKUMPET LEAF, 39 been produced in this form for the purpose of insect-catching, it may be well to note that in Willdenow’s * Species Plantarum” this singular passage occurs: “Sic metamorphosis folii Nymph in folium Sarraceniz, ut ipsa aquam pluvialem excipiens et retinens extra aquas crescat; mira nature providentia;” which may be translated: “Such is the metamorphis of the leaf of the Nymphza into that of the Sarracenia, in order that, by receiving and retain- ing rain water, it may, by a wonderful provision of nature, grow where there is no water.” The sentence is very remarkable as showing that the early fathers of modern botany had anticipated the celebrated men of our time in conceiving the theory of evo- lution. As to the idea that these pitchers are modified petioles, and that the leaf blade is something else, it is highly probable that all petioles are modified leaf blades, and that the distinction between the two is of practical value only as a help in descrip- tion and classification. It is likely that the primordial plan is that of a lobed leaf, such as we might find in the Lirzodendron, or “tulip tree,’ and that the lower lobes became united at their edges, leaving the upper, now forming the lid, free—and that the petioles of many plants may be formed in the same manner. However, as regards the Sarracenia, the manner in which the “wing” is developed in S. pszdlacina, leaving the “ pitcher” little more than a mid-rib, is very suggestive. But this is much better seen by a singular genus of this same order, Sarraceniacee, found in Guayana by Sir R. Schomberg, called Heliamphora nutans, in which the primordial leaf was evidently three-lobed, and from the orifice is so slit down on one side that we should as soon think of dividing the spathe of an arum into petiole and leaf-blade as this. We can easily see from the //eanephora that we may more correctly say the pitcher of the Sarracenia is a folded leaf than an inflated petiole. Among the interesting facts brought out within recent years is that of the different species of Sarracenia intercrossing freely together. Mr. David Moore, of the Glasnevin Botanic Gardens 40 SARRACENIA RUBRA,—RED-FLOWERED TRUMPET LEAF. in Ireland, has recently exhibited before the Royal Dublin Soci- ety, an eminently scientific body, some beautiful hybrids between our present species, S. rubra, and S. flava. In this case the hybrid resulted in forms intermediate between the two species. At one time it was thought not easy to cultivate these curious plants, but the skill of modern gardeners is not only equal to the task, but as we see, is able to raise them up from the seed to full maturity, even to the production of new forms. In regard to these new varieties, it may, however, be noted that the species are very variable even in wild nature. This variation induced Prof. Wood to group together this and several others usually regarded as good species under the name of S. Gronovit in his “Class-Book of Botany.” For the opportunity to draw our plant, we are indebted to Prof. C. S. Sargent, of the Cambridge Botanic Garden, Mass. a | — IMPATIENS ?ULVA RAt * COMPANY, SOSTON PLATE 10. IMPATIENS FULVA. SPOTTED TOUCH-ME-NOT, OR SNAP-WEED. NATURAL ORDER, BALSAMINACEE. IMPATIENS FULVA, Nuttall.—Leaves rhombic-ovate, obtusish, coarsely and obtusely serrate, teeth mucronate; pedicel two to four-flowered, short; lower gibbous sepal, acutely conical, longer than broad, with an elongated, closely reflexed spur; flowers deep orange, macu- late with many brown spots. Stem one and a half to three feet high. Leaves one to three inches long, one half as wide, having a few filiform teeth at the base. Flowers about one inch in length, the recurved spur of the lower sepals half inch long. Capsule oblong-cylindric one inch long, bursting at the slightest touch when mature, and scatter- ing the seed. (Wood’s Class-Book of Botany. See also Gray’s Manual of the Botany of the Northern United States; and Chapman’s Botany of the Southern United States.) WHIS extremely interesting plant is well known to the ell lovers of wild flowers, for it has so many points of attraction, that there are few who have not more or less observed it. ‘The flowers themselves are so peculiar in their form, and so rich in color, as to have earned for the plant the common name of “ Jewel weed;” while the remarkable sensitiveness of the seed vessels to the touch, as referred to in the description quoted from Professor Wood, has obtained for the plant the name of “Touch- me-not,” a name which is applied to this and other allied species by all the nations of Europe. The suddenness with which the seed vessel falls to pieces when it is grasped in one’s hand, no matter how lightly, is surprising to one who experiences it for the first time. When Burns wrote “ But pleasures are like poppies spread ; You seize the flower, its bloom is shed,” he unconsciously characterized also the behavior of these seed vessels which leave us so little where we expected so much! Dr. Prior says the name, “Touch-me-not,” is “a phrase that was (41) 42 IMPATIENS FULVA.—SPOTTED TOUCH-ME-NOT, OR SNAP-WEED. familiar from the ‘noli-me-tangere’ pictures in Roman Catholic countries.” The old European species is called /izpateens nolr- tangerc, and the earlier botanists of our country supposed they found the same species here, but it was finally discovered to be distinct from the European one. The botanical name of the genus, /wpatens, meaning impatient, is also derived from the peculiar behavior of the seed vessel when touched. The name Lmpatens is credited in modern works to Linnzus, who simply adopted it, as he tells us in the “Genera Plantarum,” from Rivinus, a writer of about 1690; and we find the same name in use by Deedens, a botanical author who flourished about the same time. Plukenet, Ray, and others of that period not only refer to /izpatiens, but are believed to have had our kind in view. The present species was included in the early collections of Clayton in Virginia and of Colden from New York, as we learn from the writings of Gronovius. It may appear singular to some that so old and evidently well-known a plant should bear so modern a name as one dating from only 1818, Nuttall having then named it Z /u/va. Of this Nuttall says: “This is the /. dzflora of Willdenow, and of Pursh in his ‘ Flora,’ and also the Z. maculata of Muhlenberg’s ‘Catalogue.’ As several species are spotted I have not adopted the last name; and | have changed the former because it was deceptive.” It may be observed about this that if names were to be changed in these days for such reasons as these, our list of synonyms would be hugely increased. Polygonatum biflorum may have but one flower from each axil, and again it is found with four; but no one seeks to change the name “because it is deceptive.” It is remarkable, however, that Nuttall’s name with no better reason has displaced the prior names in all American botanical works of the present time; even Mr. Sereno Watson, usually so scru- pulously impartial in the application of the laws of priority, uses Nuttall’s name as the proper one in his recent “ Bibliography.” Our work being to give a history of Botany as we find it, we, of course, have had to use the name in our quotation from Profes- sor Wood's Class-Book. IMPATIENS FULVA, SPOTTED TCUCH-ME-NOT, OR SNAP-WEED. 43 The genus has been the victim of uncertainties in some of its relationships, and the species have fared no better. Linnzus, who arranged plants on his sexual system, classed /wpatiens as a syngenesious plant! In this class were also included what we now call composites. Nuttall, who also arranged his plants on the sexual system, places it in the class Pentandria. Nor has it been more settled under the natural system of more modern botanists. Wood, from whom we quote, gives it to the order Balsaminacee. But many modern botanists do not regard this as an independent order, and the student from this point of view would have to search for our plant among the Geranzacce. A peculiar feature of this and allied species of /mpatiens is that the later flowers are often cleistogenous; that is to say, while the earlier flowers have petals and are complete in all their parts, as in our plate, the later ones have no petals, or anything that would be popularly called a flower, and yield barely pollen enough to fertilize the ovary and produce seed. Fertilization is effected before the bud opens, and the first knowledge ‘the observer has of the existence of any flowering operation is by the growing seed vessel pushing from the bud. In England, where close observations on this species have been made by Mr. A. W. Bennet, these cleistogenenic flowers have been found in the proportion of twenty to one of the petal bearing, or as they are called; “perfect” ones. In the vicinity of the writer’s home the proportion is generally about one-half. In Europe the per- fect flowers seem rarely to produce seeds. But here they bear freely, and plants may be seen covered with seed vessels before any cleistogene flowers appear. The subject is one of great interest, and will prove an inviting field for the student fond of original research. There are many facts worth noting in the life-history of the Impatiens fulva. In the “ Bulletin of the Torrey Bot. Club” for 1872, it is noted that the inhabitants of Green county, New York, call it “ Silver leaf”’ because when placed under water the leaf glistens like silver, and does not get wet. In the volume for 44 IMPATIENS FULVA.—SPOTTED TOUCH-ME-NOT, OR SNAP-WEED, 1877 of the same serial Mr. W. W. Bailey, of Providence, R. I, remarks on a friénd of his finding “the sacs all perforated by bumble-bees,” and adds: “You may remember that Dr. Gray says this is only likely to happen in a profusely flowering species.” Another writer somewhere, but the exact reference not at hand, remarks that it has been reported that the leaves hang down at nightfall, and become horizontal soon after daylight—a statement the writer of this has confirmed by actual observation. Many of these behaviors are by no means confined to the /izpatiens fulva, but they all afford interesting observations to the curious student. Besides its value in connection with its scientific lessons, it has a directly practical use to man, for Mr. Nuttall, on the authority of Dr. Barton, says it is sometimes used for dyeing salmon color; and it is said by others to be useful when applied to portions of the skin poisoned by the common poison vine, Rhus loxtcoden- adroi. In its geographical range it is confined on the Atlantic slope of our country to that portion east of the Mississippi and Mis- souri, except to a small tract within Arkansas, growing chiefly in low or damp places. According to Torrey and Gray it is also found on the north-western portion of the Pacific slope. Dr. Darlington gives as the prevailing common names “Tawny Impatiens” and “Spotted Snap-weed;” the last being more easily understood by people who are not botanists, we have proposed for adoption. Vor TL. Ab. LES. dL te IRIS VERNA L.. PRaNG & Company, Boston. Li. IRIS VERNA. SPRING IRIS. NATURAL ORDER, IRIDACEAE. IRIs VERNA, Linnzus.—Leaves linear-ensiform, rigid, rather longer than the low, one-flowered scape; tube of the perianth filiform (two inches long), about equalling the length of the segments; sepals and petals nearly equal, oblong-obovate, obtuse, neither crested nor bearded, stigma deeply bifid. Stem or scape three to five inches high, sheathed with colored bracts. Flowers pale blue, the sepals with an oblong, or orange yellow, spotted stripe. (Wood’s Class- Book of Botany. See also Chapman’s Flora of the Southern United States.) 1S one proceeds to write a popular chapter on an /7vs, the |] many poetical and historical associations connected with it crowd on the mind. Mythological accounts of its origin in connection with Juno’s fair messenger are numerous, and as no two accounts exactly agree, a collection of the various ver- sions would form a very pretty chapter in imaginative floral literature. Louisa Ann Twamley has a pretty story about the naming of the Iris at one of the courts held by Flora,—._ “All with their pearls so fair The gay flowers wreathed were, But, midst them all, Crowned at the rainbow festival, A sapphire-colored blossom shone The loveliest there; no other one Her jewels wore So gracefully. Her robe all o’er Was radiant, yet deep blue, like twilight sky, And softly shaded, as when clouds do lie Upon the deep expanse. ’Twas strange, none knew A name for this fair form, so bright and blue: But sister-flowerets fancifully said, As they to note her beauty had been led By its enhancement in the rainbow shower, They e’en would call her Iris from that hour.” (45) 46 IRIS VERNA.—SPRING IRIS, The word iris, as is well known, is Greek for rainbow, but the etymology of the word goes beyond this, acquainting us with the reason why the rainbow is so called; it seems to have been derived from zo, to foretell, the rainbow in old times having been supposed to be the heavenly messenger foretelling rain instead of, as now recognized, the actual consequence of the shower. The /ris verna is one of the earliest of spring flowers in the Southern States, being often in bloom in March among the forest leaves and before the green grass has hardly begun to grow. As Park Benjamin says of the Trailing Arbutus,— “Thou comest when spring her coronal weaves, And thou hidest thyself mid dead strewn leaves; Where the young grass lifts its tender blade, Thy home and thy resting place is made; And in the spot of thy lowly birth, ” Unseen, thou bloomest, Mrs. Sara J. Hale, in her “Flora’s Interpreter,” explains to the reader that the Trailing Arbutus is “a sort of a strawberry vine, found in New England in March, the earliest of all spring flowers.” When such a monstrous suggestion can pass through the current of literature unchallenged, we shall surely be par- doned for using the poet's lines so appropriately here. Our plate shows the arrangement by which the plant is able to flower so early. Most Irises have to give as much growth to the flowering shoot as to the leaves on the barren shoots. Indeed in many cases the flower scape exceeds the leaves in length. In this species the increase of the plant is by under- ground runners which form leaf buds at various distances along their length. These buds make leaves at once, and form other buds at the base which do not develop till the following spring. These basal buds which are to flower push up immediately when the warm spring weather comes, and bloom as soon as they reach the surface, forming only a few diminutive leaves along the stems. Our Fig. 1 represents this. At Fig. 2 we have the IRIS VERNA.—SPRING IRIS. 47 terminal growth of the underground runner for the season. This also has buds at the base, but shows no disposition to flower, and from this we may infer that the buds which do flower are considerably developed before winter sets in, and this too may be in favor of its early blossoming. Much may remain to be learned about its habits. The opportunity to study its behavior in a state of nature has not been favorable, as it inhabits woods in the South within a somewhat limited region, and away from thickly settled places. Professor Wood says only “ Hilly woods in the interior of the Southern States;” and Dr. Chapman says, “ Pine barrens of the middle districts, mostly in dry soil, Alabama to North Carolina.” It may perhaps be found more extended than this when the local botany of the Southern States shall be more fully known. The editor of the “Botanical Gazette” notices in the first volume of that serial that he found it on the “knobs of Southern Indiana ;” and Dr. Gray admits it into his “Manual of Botany of the Northern United States” as being found in Virginia and Kentucky. Though confined to such a comparatively limited district, it seems to have early attracted the attention of botanists in our country. Gronovius in his “Flora Virginica,” ed. of 1762, notices it as having been known to David Bannister, who collected much earlier in the century. It was also in the collec- tion which Clayton sent to him. It seems to have been known in England as a cultivated plant so early as 1748. The peculiar running roots, not common at least in /77s, were noticed by these early botanists. In those days the binomial system, or that which restricted the names to two, that of genera and species, had not been adopted, and Gronovius refers to this as the Iris which has “a fibrous root, one flowered stalk, shorter than the leaves, and with a beardless corolla.’ To Linnaeus we are indebted for the short specific name verva in place of the long string of descriptives as given above. The Irises of the old world have been very much improved by natural selection and inter-crossing, and of some of the kinds 48 IRIS VERNA.—SPRING IRIS. a large number of varieties have been obtained of much superior beauty to the originals. Floriculture has not yet had the same devoted skill and attention bestowed on it in the New World, and hence many of our beautiful plants are awaiting some energetic florist’s care to rival in beauty and variety some of the famous race of florists’ flowers of Europe. Our spring Iris offers great inducements for such nice work as this, and if once improved would no doubt not only be popular as a spring flower, but there would be the addition of the fragrance which it possesses, for most of the popular races of improved Irises of the gardens are wanting in this great attraction. There is no doubt it would readily change under the hands of the florists, as there seem to be variations in nature. Gronovius, already quoted, speaks of Clayton having found one with pure white flowers ; and Peter Collinson, in a letter to John Bartram, dated March 4th, 1764, refers to his “true correspondent, Mrs. Logan,” sending him “what she calls a white Iris from Georgia,” but whether certainly of this species we cannot tell. Gronovius says the vernal Iris was reputed to have medicinal qualities, and Dr. Peyre Porcher seems to confirm this by remarking that “it is said to possess properties similar to those of the L. versicolor.’ The chief of these properties may be given in the language of Bartram that “the root is considered by the Indians a very powerful cathartic, and it is found in artificial ponds made for the purpose near their villages.” For the plant from which our drawing was made we are indebted to Prof. Sargent, of the Cambridge Botanical Garden. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—1. Leaf growth of last year with flower bud the following spring arising from its base. 2, Terminal growth of the previous year, Pr aie TZ. ibe Vo WOODSIA OBTUSA. PRANG & ComMPANY, BOSTON. f Vs WOODSIA OBTUSA. COMMON WOODSIA. NATURAL ORDER, FILICES. Woopsia optusa, Torrey.—Frond sub-pinnate, or nearly tri-pinnate. Minutely glandular- pilous; leaflets distant; segments of the leaflets pinnatifid; ultimate segments roundish- oblong, obtuse, bi-dentate; sori round, one at each cleft between the leaflets, at length crowded; stipe somewhat chaffy. Fronds lance-oblong in outline, three times as long as wide. Segments of the leaflets crevate-serrate, the lower ones distinct, upper con- fluent. Sori orbicular, becoming nearly confluent, each at first enclosed in the silvery indusium which when open is notched into little teeth on the margin. (Wood’s Class- Book of Botany. See also Gray’s Flora of the Northern United States, Chapman's flora of the Southern United States, and Williamson’s Servs of Kentucky.) GAGLONG the Wissahickon Creek, in Fairmount Park, Phila- ea delphia, and from whence the plant was taken which served us for an illustration, this fern is not uncommon, and it is remarkable that it is almost always to be found on dry walls —that is to say, wails built of stone without mortar—when these walls are ina damp or shady place. The little ledges formed by the stones, and the little spaces between the stones in the wall, are favorite situations with this fern, as also are those parts of the stone breastworks of dams over which the water does not actually flow. Occasionally it is found in the crevices of rocks, but the collector will be much more likely to meet with it in this Park by going to the nearest old wall than to any other place. It is a very interesting fern, though in all that constitutes beauty, there are others superior to it. One of its happiest phases is towards the fall of the year, when the short barren fronds which form the outer circle bend downwards, forming a sort of rosette, in the centre of which the fertile fronds some- what erectly stand. In the part of our country where our illus- 4 (49) 50 WOODSIA OBTUSA.—COMMON WOODSIA. tration grew, these barren fronds keep tolerably green till the new ones come in spring, when they give way soon after the appearance of the fertile fronds, and, later in the season, another set of barren fronds appear. Our specimen was taken about the end of May, and from this time to the end of October the student may find along the Wissahickon excellent specimens for study. In other parts of the country the plant does not seem to be so highly favored. Mr. Williamson says, in his “Ferns of Kentucky,” “that in that State it grows in exposed situations, being better able to endure the direct rays of the sun than most ferns. But in such places the pinnze are often very much contracted, so that they seem to be crisp, and apparently rolled up.” In Indiana also, according to a correspondent of the first volume of the “ Botanical Gazette,’ who writes from Hanover, it dies away early in the season. He says: “Early in July, while rambling among some of the limestone cliff rocks of the Ohio River, we secured our first specimens of Asplendum Rita-mura- za, in beautiful fruit; and since then we have visited the same region every month in order to confirm our observations as to its being an evergreen, and we are now fully convinced of the accu- racy of our former remarks on this point. Associated with this species and fruiting abundantly at the same time, we found quite a growth of Iloodsta ob/usa, but by the end of August it had entirely withered away. Its fruiting season begins here proba- bly early in June.” Other botanists seem to have very much lim- ited the time when it may be found in fruit. Dr. Darlington in his “Flora Cestrica”’ gives merely “ July ;” as also does Professor Asa Gray and Professor Wood, from whom our botanical description is taken. They are probably referring to the time of the fruit’s first appearance; but for the benefit of those who are making collections it is well to note how long it endures. Its botanical history has been varied. The knowledge of the true character of ferns is of comparatively modern date. In the time of Linnzus all the known North American ferns would be referred to a very few genera, possibly only to Osmunda, Plerts, WOODSIA OBTUSA.—COMMON WOODSIA. SI Adiantum, Asplenium and FPolypodium. Our plant seems to have been known to Sprengel, a voluminous author of the first quarter of our century, who probably received his specimen from his Pennsylvania correspondent, Muhlenberg, and it is referred to by other writers about that period as Polypodium obtusum. Swartz, a well-known botanical authority, especially on ferns, is usually quoted by moderns for the name, but we refer to Sprengel in connection with it as the proper authority. As ferns became better understood it was conceded not to be a Polypodium, and it was placed as an Asfprdium, a genus established by Swartz, under which name it is recorded by Muhlenberg in his catalogue issued in 1813. The genus IT0d- sia had been established by R. Brown before this, and Polypo- dium Lvensts and others placed therein; and it was not until its true relations were established by Dr. Torrey, that the name it is now known by—/To0dsva obtusa—came into general use. The name //oodsia is due to Robert Brown, who by it com- memorated his friend Joseph Wood, an English botanist who in the earlier part of the present century attained considerable celebrity by a monograph of Roses, and who continued to be a valuable contributor to botanical science up to the time of his death in 1864. The name odéusum is obvious, but why given to our species is not so clear. Many of the species with which it was then associated in its early history had pinnules which ter- minated sharply, and some one of this character nearly allied to it might have suggested a comparison with this species which had them move obtuse. At any rate the comparison which we _have now to make with its present family relations, is unfavora- ble to its name, as some of its sister species have blunter leaves. However it might have passed as an “obtuse-leaved Lolyfo- dium,” it is misleading to call it “obtuse-leaved MWoodsia,” as is often the case in botanical works. It is an illustration of the trouble that arises from the use of specific names which mean something, and is a good point for those who regcrd personal names as much more satisfactory. Its old name of “Rock Poly 52 WOODSIA OBTUSA.—COMMON WOODSIA. pody” is also objectionable, though still much in use. As we are left without any acceptable popular name, we would suggest “Common Woodsia,” as it is perhaps the best known of all the American species of the genus. It is widely distributed over the Eastern portion of the United States. Mr. Redfield includes it in his Appalachian group, which comprises those species found in the mountain and hilly regions of the United States east of the Mississippi. Dr. Gray in his “ Manual” locates it on “Rocky banks and cliffs especially northward;”? Chapman gives “ Rocks along the Allegheny Mountains and northwards;” and Wood refers it to “among and on rocks, New York, to Kentucky and Tennessee.” It is possible it may be a little beyond the strict line of the Mis- sissippi, of which botanically the Missouri forms a part, for Mr. James Wilson reports it from Leavenworth, Kansas, and Pro- fessor Lesquereux regards it, though with some doubt, as indig- enous to Arkansas. Mr. Howard Shriver notes it as abundant in Pulaski county, Vu ginia. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—1I. Medium-sized specimen from Pennsylvania, taken in June. 2. Enlarged pinna in fruit. Vou Ill PE ACELIA BIPINNAT FIDA PRENG Gsriran BOSTON Piatt N PVLACELIA BIPINN IATIFIDA. BIPIN NATE PHACIOUIA. NATURAL ORDER, HYDROPHYLLACE.®. fichaux.—A feet or more high from a slender biennial root, PHACELIA BIFTS erect, NATIPIDA, lately branched, ioopubesceat ami above mostly viscku and glandular: iibin, pinnately three tn seven-civided; the ‘livisions ider-petled. cree : > the lower sely ond ireepularly incised or pinaatifis feonfluent: racemcs loose, seven tu twenty flowered : “pede! spre fruii recurved: valyx- ies linear, loose, longer than the globular capsule : Comite rotste-campanulate, viclet-blue, over Ye if on iach in diameter, with rather short rounded Jobes and very conspicuous internal eae stamens (bearded) and sty;!s usually more or less exserted, . (Gray's Sysoptica’ as of Meorh America. See also Gray’s Manwal of the Botany of the Northern Cniics cag Chey man’s Flora of the Southern Caled Sieter; and Nood’s Chage £00k of Bottny.5 IN Dr.. Gray’s recent “Syuoptical Flora of North America,” fom which we have taken our botanical erheleits are described; and yet less than oe 3 a huvdred years age not one was known, The first know!- edge of them seems. te have been gained from Commerson's celebrated voyage, when one which we now know as Péucedia cwvemmata was found in the Straits of Magellan. lewas at tha: time thought to be a Helictrope, and eee Vahl a Danish botanist, and one of the most celebrated of that time, named i fletiotraprum pianatum, under which it is to be searchec: for i the earier writings of Willdenow and of some others. But | te well-known botanist of the end of the last centu ry, “Genera Plantarum” published in 1789, made a new i, seeefia, which name’ it still bears. That particular Huwers erowing in dense bunches or fascicies,. ed ihe “name, fhaketas being Greek for a 4 species is very remarkable fens PHACELIA BIPINNATIFIDA. BIPINNATE PHACELIA. NATURAL ORDER, HYDROPHYLLACE®. PHACELIA BIPINNATIFIDA, Michaux.—A foot or more high from a slender biennial root, erect, paniculately branched, hirsute-pubescent and above mostly viscid and glandular: leaves slender-petioled, green and thin, pinnately three to seven-divided; the divisions ovate or oblong-ovate, acute, coarsely and irregularly incised or pinnatifid; the lower short-petiolulate and the uppermost confluent: racemes loose, seven to twenty-flowered: pedicels spreading or in fruit recurved: calyx-lobes linear, loose, longer than the globular capsule: corolla rotate-campanulate, violet-blue, over half an iach in diameter, with rather short rounded lobes and very conspicuous internal appendages: stamens (bearded) and style usually more or less exserted. (Gray’s Synoptica’ Flora of North America. See also Gray’s Manual of the Botany of the Northern United States ; Chap- man’s Flora of the Southern United States ; and Wood's Class-Book of Botany.) IN Dr. Gray's recent “Synoptical Flora of North i America,” from which we have taken our botanical description, fifty-five Phaceleas are described; and yet less than a hundred years ago not one was known. The first knowl- edge of them seems to have been gained from Commerson’s celebrated voyage, when one which we now know as Phacelia circinata was found in the Straits of Magellan. It was at that time thought to be a Heliotrope, and Martin Vahl, a Danish botanist, and one of the most celebrated of that time, named it fFlehiotropium pinnatum, under which it is to be searched for in the earlier writings of Willdenow and of some others. But Jussieu, the well-known botanist of the end of the last century, in his “Genera Plantarum” published in 1789, made a new genus of it, Phacelia, which name it still bears. That particular species has the flowers growing in dense bunches or fascicles, and this suggested the name, pfhakclos being Greek for a fasicuius or bunch. This original species is very remarkable (53) 54 PHACELIA BIPINNATIFIDA.—BIPINNATE PHACELIA. for its great geographical range, being, as “the Botany of the Geological Survey of California” tells us, “common to the two Continents and ranges almost throughout their length,” meaning the Northern and Southern portions of this one Continent, for the genus is wholly confined to the Western Hemisphere,—and indeed nearly the whole of them are natives of the United States. The history of these Phacelias affords a lesson in the laws of nomenclature which it may be well to explain to the student as we pass along. Though we adopt the name first given by the botanist who describes the plant, the description which he gives with his name is not always accepted without modification. For instance Phacelia described by Jussieu requires the plants com- ” while the genus as now described in the Botany of California has the corolla from “almost rotate to narrow funnel form.” Then the stamens according to Jussieu must be “exserted and styles short” to constitute a Phacelia, while Dr. Gray in the “ Sy- prising the genus to have corollas “ sub-campanulate ; nopsis” makes no generic reference to the stamens or pistils,— indeed some Phacelias, as we now understand them, have not exserted stamens, and as we may see in our plate, have styles that are certainly not short. In fact if a student were to read carefully the description of the genus as given by Jussieu, and then that by Brewer, Watson, or Dr. Gray, he could scarcely believe that the same plants were intended by the same name. Again we may have a lesson respecting the specific names. The author's name, which we attach to the name of a plant, does not imply that that author was the first who described the species, and who first made it known,—but that he was the person who applied that particular name to the plant. For instance, there is a plant which was known as £utoca sericea of Graham, and Curtis’ “ Botanical Magazine.” But Professor Gray does not recognize Zufoca as sufficiently distinct to form a separate genus from Phacelia, so he renames it, and it stands as Phacelia sericea of Gray. In this way Graham loses all credit, PHACELIA BIPINNATIFIDA.—BIPINNATE PHACELIA. 55 and there is nothing whatever to associate his name with the history of the plant, unless some botanical antiquary digs it out from the mass of synonyms under which so much lies buried. It does not seem fair, but it is the law of botany, and indeed it is one of those necessities which must be submitted to. Several supposed genera, as for instance Cosmanthus, Whidlavia and fiutoca, which once had severally many species under their names, are all now regarded by Dr. Gray as sections of Phacelia, and this is why the genus seems to have grown so large as it is at the present time. Our pretty species, Phacclia bipinnatifida, has little to boast of in the way of popular history; but it will commend itself to all lovers of wild flowers by its simple beauty. It does not appear to have been noticed by the older botanists; Michaux in_ his “Flora of North America,” in 1803, being the first to name and describe it, probably from Kentucky specimens, It is subject to some variations, one of sufficient character to have been regarded as a distinct species. This is Lhacelia brevistylis of Buckley, though now only a variety of Gray, while still retaining its original specific name. This particular variety was found in Alabama by Professor S. B. Buckley, now the State Geologist of Texas. In its geographical relations it is found according to Professor Gray, in his “Synopsis,” “in the shaded banks of streams, from Ohio and Illinois to Alabama.” It does not seem to extend to the lower lands near the coast, and is probably not usually met with by collectors along what might be properly called the seaboard States. Darby, in his “Botany of the Southern States,” does not include it even in so late an edition as 1866. Dr. Chapman has it in his “Flora,” but confines it to “shaded banks in Alabama and North Carolina.” Professor Wood finds it in “ woods and hill-sides, Pennsylvania, to Indiana (Plummer), Missouri and Ohio.” We may gather from all this that it favors a mountain region, and is partial to the shade of open woods. In the “Botanical Gazette” for 1876, the editor notices very singular behavior in the plant in his section, Jeffer- 5 6 PHACELIA BIPINNATIFIDA.—BIPINNATE PHACELIA. son county, Indiana. He says: “Phacelia bipinnatifida, Mx., seems to be very uncertain in its growth. For two seasons | watched closely for it and did not secure a single specimen; but this spring our hill-sides are fairly blue with it, and its presence may be perceived by the peculiar pungent odor rising from it.” This periodicity in their appearance has however been noted in connection with some other plants; but whether it be that the seed retains its vitality for several years until a favorable season occurs for its germination, or whether it be that there were a few plants that escaped the researcher's observation, which perfected seed, and 2. favorable season following encour- aged toa more than usual growth, has never been clear to the mind of the writer, and renewed observations are needed. It is a biennial and has often been introduced to culture, but has never become a stancard stock in seedsmen’s catalogues, showing that it does not remain long in gardens. Possibly its shade-loving character, as judged from its native locations, renders it impatient of open sunny garden borders; but its beauty when under favorable circumstances should make it worth while to attempt to humor it. The drawing for our plate was made from a plant under Mr. Dawson’s charge in the Arnold Arboretum of Cambridge, Massachusetts. RUDBECKIA FULGIDA. BRILLIANT CONE-FLOWER. NATURAL ORDER, COMPOSIT.E. RUDBECKIA FULGIDA, Aiton.—Stem hirsute with rigid hairs; branches slender, naked above; leaves strigous-pubescent, remotely dentate, radical petiolate, ovate, five-veined, cauline lance-oblong, tapering to the sessile, sub-clasping base; scales oblong, spreading, as long as the spreading rays; pales glabrous, linear oblong, obtuse. Stem from one to three feet high. Rays twelve to fourteen, scarcely longer than the leafy involucre, deep orange- yellow. (Wood’s Class-Book of Botany. See also Gray’s Manual of the Botany of the Northern (nited States, and Chapman’s flora of the Southern United States.) WHE genus Rudbeckia to which our present illustration belongs has received no common name from the com- mon people; but botanists have called it the “Cone-flower,” because the conical receptacle, or that which supports the centre of the flower, is more conical than that of the sun-flowers (/7/c/ian- thus) with which it was thought to have some relationship many years ago. It is proper however to remind the reader that names must be regarded as but names, and little more; for in naming a plant from some peculiarity we can never know when another one may be discovered having the same character though differing in something else. Indeed it often happens that a new plant, waiting for a name, has a known peculiarity much more strikingly developed than its elder sister. We cannot however alter names on this account, because such a change would be a greater evil than the misunderstandings from the application of the term. It has therefore become the habit to regard lightly the meaning of the name so far as identification of the plant is concerned. This is worth remembering when we think of “Cone-flower” in connection with Azddécckia, for there (57) 53 kKUDBECKIA FULGIDA,— BRILLIANT CONE-FLOWER. are now genera not far removed from Rudbeckia, which have the receptacle as much and in some cases more conical than these. The conical receptacle must have attracted considerable atten- tion from the first, for before the genus was named Rudbeckia by Linnzus it was described as Oleliscotheca by Sebastian Vail- lant, a French botanist, the name being from the Greek odclish, and ¢heca, a cell—the little cell-like florets being arranged on the obelisk or cone-like receptacle. But Linnaeus when he reformed botanical nomenclature ruled that generic names, composed of two distinct nouns, or of two words one of which is entire, if ever allowed, were not to be imitated; and we can readily understand why Odelscotheca should be replaced; so in 1737 in the “Genera Plantarum” of Linnzus we find the genus dedi- cated to the Rudbecks “Olao patri, et olao filio”—Olaus the father and Olaus the son—and not merely “frem M. Rudbeck, a Swede, author of a Botanical work entitled ‘Campos Elysius,’” as one of our text-books tells us. These Rudbecks were the predecessors in the Chair of Botany at Upsal in Sweden, and there seems to be no special reason why their names should be connected with these plants beyond the fact that Linnzeus had a high regard for them. It is a distinctively American genus, having no representatives in the Old World, and to us in these days it may be allowable to regret that all plants of this charac- ter did not commemorate the names of those in immediate con- nection with the knowledge of American plants. Rudbeckia has many points of interest worthy of the student’s attention, which, though they can be observed more or less in many other genera, are striking here. \We may remember that a flower head in Compostte is as if a piece of wire were drawn round in many coils; and that if we could draw out this wire- like coil, it would appear as any ordinary stem growth—say a long willow branch, with a single flower in the axil of each leaf. As we know in some plants the leaves remain almost unchanged as bracts, and in other cases they are wholly wanting, as is generally the case in the cabbage tribe; so in Composites the RUDBECKIA FULGIDA.—BRILLIANT CONE-FLOWER. 59 -same general principles exist. What are called the scales of the receptacle are really floral bracts, which in some cases are wholly obliterated in the drawing in of the spiral coil to form the compound head. In this genus /udbeckia these scales or bracts are very prominent in the centre of the flower, and it is not till the divisions of the little florets are ready to expand that we see them above the tips of the scales. Again in some com- posites that have a sort of spicate habit, the plant will complete its growth before any flowers expand, and then it commences the blossoming from the top downwards; while others flower from below upwards as the flower shoot grows. ‘These varying phases of growth also have a counterpart in these single heads. Sometimes there is more activity in the centre of the flower than in the circumference, and these varying phases make differences in the sexual characters. In some it results in giving the ray florets an advantage; in Rudbeckia the ray will be found quite barren, rarely producing the vestige of a pistil, and no sign of a stamen; while the central or disk florets are perfectly herma- phrodite, and alone bear perfect seed. The development of the florets in our present species, 7. fulgida, is very interesting. The corolla appears to be forced open by the growth of the pistil, which as it elongates, pushes on before it an immense quantity of beautiful yellow pollen. The first knowledge we have of the opening of the flower is from the appearance of this pollen through the divisions of the corolla. This profusion of pollen seems very welcome to a large number of insects, is collected at once, and so completely that it is only by putting a flower under protection that the pretty little crown of yellow can be seen and the progress of the opening florets traced. When it is remembered that a single grain of pollen is sufficient to fertilize a single ovule, which finally becomes the seed, one is lost in wonder that so much effort should be spent on its production, It may be in some way connected with the plant’s own good, or it may be the result of a far-reaching Omnipotence making the plant work for 60 RUDBECKIA FULGIDA.—-BRILLIANT CONE-FLOWER. the good of other members of creation, or even for the future of its own race, beyond its own immediate individual interest. Our Rudbeckia fulgida has the general aspect of some of its neighbors, and especially of A. Azvta, from which however its smooth chaff is a good distinction. The chaff of A. Azr¢a is hairy at the summit. In his “School Botany,’’ Dr. Gray gives a list of “the com- monest species,” and as ours is omitted, we may regard it as rare. It is indeed much more limited in its geographical range than some of its kindred, yet one who has seen it so abundantly as it is found in the meadows of Eastern Pennsylvania may well wonder why it has not spread more elsewhere. Pennsylvania seems its northern limit. It extends to Central Ohio, and then southwesterly to Arkansas, which is its western line. From this it extends southeasterly to Florida, keeping, Professor Wood says, chiefly to the more elevated districts. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—I. Root leaves. 2. Upper portion of stem with fluwers. 3. Disk floret with akene and chaffy scale at the base. 4. Disk floret opened, showing the short stamens through which the pistil has protruded. Pollen grains on the expanded lobes. 5. Pollen grain magnified. Vou. II. . PLatE 715. CYPRIPEDIUM ACAULE. iL. PRANG & CoMPANY. Boston Var TT de CYPRIPEDIUM ACAULE. STEMLESS MOCCASIN FLOWER. NATURAL ORDER, ORCHIDACE/E. CYPRIPEDIUM ACAULE, Aiton.—Scape leafless, one-flowered ; leaves two, radical, elliptic-oblong, rather acute; lobe of the column roundish-rhomboidal, acuminate, deflexed; petals Jan- ceolate; lip longer than the petals, cleft before. Leaves large, plaited, and downy. Scape ten to fourteen inches high, with a single lanceolate bract at the base of the large, solitary flower. Sepals half an inch long, the two lower completely united into a broad lanceolate one beneath the lip. Petals lateral, wavy. (Wood’s Class-Book of Botany. See also Gray’s A/anual of the Botany of the Northern United States ; and Chapman’s Flora of the Southern United States.) HIS species is one of the best known of the moccasin S4]| flowers, and has received many popular names. Among ‘ten may be noted purple Lady’s-slipper, Noah's ark, and Dwarf Umbil, as perhaps the best known. Even the botanists have multiplied their special names; and while some write of it under the title of Cypripedium acaule, as given at the head of this chapter, there are others who always refer to it as C. humile. The latter name was given to it by Salisbury in the “Transactions of the Linnzean Society of London,” and the former by Aiton. Of the modern American authors, Barton, Darby, and others use Salisbury’s name; while Gray, Chapman, and Wood employ the name given by Aiton. The two names must have appeared about the same time at the end of the last cen- tury. The rule is to take the oldest. Our modern botanists are generally careful in deciding these questions, and we pre- sume C. acaule will prevail. This species of moccasin flower has been known for a long time to botanists, and a figure of it appears in Curtis’ “ Botanical Magazine” in 1792. The editor says: “We have not figured a) 62 CYPRIPEDIUM ACAULE.—STEMLESS MOCCASIN FLOWER. the present species of Cypripedium so much on account of its beauty as of its rarity, for it is far less handsome than any of the other species that we are acquainted with.” It may be noted here that the species is very variable, and Mr. Curtis had but one of the poorest of the varieties to draw from. Cur readers, looking at our drawing, will probably pronounce it a beautiful species. We have often found taller specimens on the hills bor- dering the Susquehanna river in Pennsylvania, besides larger and more vigorous every way than that which we have selected for illustration. The color of the one in our plate is, however, as rich as in any of the forms usually found. There are some special points in the structure of this Cypripe- dium which gives its beauty a peculiar interest among moccasin flowers. The peculiar slipper-like lip, which is so striking in other species, is modified in this one by having, as Professor Wood says, “the lip cleft before’”—that is to say, the shoe has been slit down along the upper portion of the foot! This makes it look more like a shell than a slipper. Another peculiarity is that it is stemless—that is, the flower stalk arises directly from the root stock, and is not supported on a leafy stem, as in other species. Herein is found the derivation of both of its names— acaule and humile ; each signifying a lowly condition of existence. It grows naturally under trees in rather dry situations. Dr. Gray in the “ Manual” says it is found in “dry or moist woods, under evergreens.” If this mean that it is only found under evergreens, the observations of that distinguished author are at variance with those of other collectors. In Pennsylvania the writer has but once collected it under hemlock spruces. Its general place of growth is in woeds of deciduous trees, and in such situations it is usually found in New Jersey. Though in these places it is somewhat gregarious, that is to say, a great number may be often collected in one wood; the individual plants are much scattered, and are generally at least several feet apart. One of the most interesting branches of modern botanical study relates to the manner in which flowers receive their pollen. CYPRIPEDIUM ACAULE.—STEMLESS MOCCASIN FLOWER. 63 In some plants the floral arrangements are such that the flower cannot receive its own pollen, and it seems to some botanists that this is in accord with a pre-arranged plan to compel the use only of pollen brought from other flowers by insect aid. In this study Cypripedium has taken a prominent part, Dr. Gray, in “ Silliman’s Journal” for 1867, deciding after a careful examina- tion of the structure “in all the species, it is impossible that fertil- ization should be effected without extraneous aid.” Our present species, C. acaule, is one that was the especial object of Dr. Gray’s examination. He shows that its pollen is very sticky, and is carried away either bodily or piece-meal on the heads or other parts of insects. He describes how they enter the flower by one lateral opening in search of sweets with the pollen on their heads rubbing against the stigma, and escaping by the hole on the other side! Dr. Gray says he has not detected insects actually at work in this way, but he gathers from their traces and from a variety of facts that, “even in Cypripedium acaule, the insects act in the manner described.” ‘The study of these singu- lar arrangements, some connected especially with the plant we have illustrated here, led him to say, “ Hereafter teleology must go hand-in-hand with morphology; functions must be studied as well as forms, and useful ends presumed, whether ascertained or not, in every permanent modification of every structure.” It is remarkable that the attempts to cultivate this plant, extending over the past one hundred years, have met with little success. According to Aiton, the plant was first introduced into English gardens in a living state “about 1775 by William Ham- ilton, Esq.,” and this is generally followed by chronologists. But we find by Darlington’s “Memorials” that in a letter to Peter Collinson dated November, 1761, John Bartram writes of having sent roots of it to his friend. From that time till now the stock in Europe has been kept up mainly by importation of full grown roots from our land. Mr. Robinson, in his interesting “Alpine Flowers,” gives minute directions for its successful cul- ture, but concludes: “It may be propagated by division, but the 64 CYPRIPEDIUM ACAULE.—-STEMLESS MOCCASIN FLOWER. plants in the country at present are too small and puny to bear this.” In our own country a correspondent of the “ Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club,” in the third volume, remarks: “I cannot keep Cypripedium acaule, although I have seen it in nearly pure dry sand and in wet sphagnum (moss.) _ It is curious that C. acaule has only one bud to each plant.” So far as this last point is concerned, it will be noted that the one illustrated has two, though only one flowered. The purple moccasin flower is rather widely distributed. We have special notes of its being collected in almost all the seaboard states from Maine to North Carolina. It has been found in Kentucky, and in the northwestern part of the United States as far as Minnesota, EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—Complete plant, a Massachusetts specimen furnished by Mr. Jackson Dawson. 2. The column, or central part of the flower enlarged, and showing the united mass of stamens with the pistil, or, as it is said, its “gynandrous”’ character. Vou Il PLATE 16. CAMPTOSORUS RHIZOPHYLLUS. PRatic & COMPANY, Boston. CAMPTOSORUS. RHIZOPHYLLUS, WALKING-LEAF. NATURAL OFDER, FILICES. CAMPTOSORUS RHIZOPHYLLUS, Link.—Fronds auriculate-cordate at the base, lanceolate, with a long slender acumination which often takes root at the apex. Frond two to nine inches long, and half of an inch to an inch wide, evergreen, sometimes bifid with two acuminations ; stipe one to four inches long, slightly margined above, smooth. Sori often half an inch in length. (Darlington’s Flora Cestrica. See also Gray’s Manual of the Botany of the Northern United States, Chapman’s flora of the Southern United States, and [as Ante- gramma rhizophylla\ Wood's Class-Book of Botany. Aliso Eaton’s Lerns of North Amer- ica and Williamson’s Ferns of Kentucky.) HOSE who are fond of wild Nature, and who love to take | her just as she is, fresh from her Maker’s hands, often have to thank their favorite poets for beautiful thoughts which seem to deeply engrave the scene on the memory, and which enable them to recall the pleasant picture at any future time. We have just such an impression as we are writing these lines on the Walking-leaf Fern, though the reality passed many years ago. It was on the Lehigh river in Northern Pennsylvania, and far from human habitations. The Pine trees interlaced their branches, and little vegetation could exist in the shade beneath ; only the trailing yew, and, everywhere on the huge scattered rocks, the Walking-leaf fern. It seemed the very suggestion of the invocation of the well-known English poet Thomson— “To Him, ye vocal gales, Breathe soft whose spirit in your freshness breathes ; Oh, talk of Him in solitary gloom! Where, o’er the rock, the scarcely-waving Pine Fills the brown shade with a religious awe.” It is indeed generally in these sombre, awe-inspiring, rocky 6 5 (65) 66 CAMPTOSORUS RHIZOPHYLLUS. — WALKING-LEAF, woods that our plant is found in Pennsylvania; and in other states some similar situation is usually its home. The specimen for our illustration was gathered near Philadelphia, along the Wissahickon «Tn the green valley, where the silver brook, From its full laver, pours the white cascade ; And, bubbling low amid the tangled woods, Slips down through moss-grown stones with endless laughter; ” and where, if Longfellow had taken this pretty picture from the very spot, he might have noticed the Walking-leaf on the moss- grown stones among which here at least it loves to grow. There has been much controversy as to the kind of rock on which the plant is found growing, some writers having claimed for limestone the sole privilege of finding ita home. But great numbers of observers have since recorded locations on sandstone rock; and the specimen we illustrate was taken from gneiss, a variety of granite rock, on the western side of the Wissahickon before referred to. That it was well satisfied with its location is seen by its picture, which is a fair average of its condition as found anywhere. It is however a very variable fern. Many collectors have found specimens with double fronds, one of the auricles or ear-like lobes at the base having grown out to almost the extent of the main blade, and rooting at the ends like its parent, or, as in such cases one might almost say, sister frond. Where our specimen was found one frond was gathered which had both auricles developed into fronds, not as. long as the central one, all three rooting at the ends, and having a remark- ably trifid character. Then while there are these variations in the line of division, there are often found tendencies in the opposite direction, that is to say, to be entire leaved. Mr. E. A. Rau, of Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, contributes to the first volume of “ The Botanical Gazette” an account of many varying forms, among others “some bearing sori, in which the frond is remarkably short, oblong, obtuse, widening at the basé into obtuse auricles.” When it is noticed, as in our plate, how long and tapering are the terminations of the fronds, CAMPTOSORUS RHIZOPHYLLUS. WALKING-LEAF, 67 it will be understood how different in general appearance an oblong obtuse frond must be. Mr. Jacob Stauffer collected a form at Mount Joy, according to Dr. Gray, with roundish sort and inconspicuous veins. There is one character which is generally constant: the veins seem to cross each other’s path, and form a sort of net-work, or as it is technically called, they anastomose. The earlier botanists had overlooked or placed little value on these characters from the veins of ferns, and hence our species was called by Linnzus Asplenium rhisophyllum. But the moderns have restricted Aspleniun to those which have free veins; that is to say, veins which continue their whole length without touching each other. Our species was taken from Asfplenium in 1833 by Link, a Ger- man botanist, and called Camptosorus, the name being derived from two Greek words, signifying a bent heap, and this because the sori, or the little long heaps of sporangia, are “generally curved,” according to John Smith; or as Professor Eaton explains, “the indusia of the areoles next the midrib are also often bent at an angle, and the two portions plainly united.” This manner of veining—called in botany, venation—has not proved so constant a character in ferns as it was expected to be by those who first perceived its importance in classification. In the present instance we have a plant so remarkably near Asplenium pinnatifidum, that it is difficult for the common observer to see any material difference till he is told to notice whether the veins anastomose. On this anastomosing of the veins, which no morphologist would regard as of great moment, our plant is placed in a genus almost by itself. Professor Eaton is no doubt fully justified in his remark that it is by no- means impossible that Canzp/osorus will be again remanded to Asplenium, “tor it is now pretty generally admitted that differ- ences 1n venation do not constitute valid generic distinctions ;” and one might add scarcely specific differences either, for in many cases the individual plant varies in this respect. In our plate the frond (Fig. 4), a younger and barren one, is much 68 CAMPTOSORUS RHIZOPHYLLUS. —- WALKING-LEAF, more reticulated, or net-veined than the maturer and fruitful ones (Fig. 2). Indeed it is our experience that when a frond is abundantly fruitful, the veins are often wholly free. It may be also remarked that in the enlarged drawing at p. 75 of Mr. Williamson's “Ferns of Kentucky,’ the veins are all wholly clear of each other. Asplenium pinnatifidum is remarkable for its fertility. Often early formed and small fronds are as completely covered with sporangia as larger and more recent ones, and it has little dispo- sition to make terminal buds; while the Camptosorus is compara- tively a sparse-fruiting fern, and makes up for this by its power of increasing from terminal buds (whence comes its name rhzzo- phylum). t would be curious if it should ultimately prove that the one form has been evolved from the other by a sort of dif- ference of opinion, as one might almost say, as to the best methods of reproduction, and that the greater divarication of the veins in the walking-leaf (which is really all the difference) is a mere incident in the reproductive question. The Camptosorus under its older names has been long known to botanists, having been noticed by Ray, Morison, Plukenet, and others of the early English authors of the first part of the eighteenth century. Gronovius had specimens sent to him both by Clayton from Virginia and Colden from New York. Michaux found it “not abundant” from “Canada to Tennessee.” Dr. Gray says its home is from “west New England to Wiscon- sin and southwards.” The writer of this has found it abundantly | on the rocks running from east to west across the state in South- ern Illinois, and Professor Lesquereux found it in Arkansas. EXPLANATION OF THE PLATE.—1. Complete plant. 2. Fertile frond. 3. Rooting point of one frond. 4. Barren frond conspicuously netted-veined, eA ae, PULEMONIUM REPTANS |. PRANG & Company, Boston. ote dye aga ESN ASE Ay wee eye POLEMONIUM REPTANS. CREEPING GREEK VALERIAN. NATURAL ORDER, POLEMONIACE, POLEMONIUM REPTANS, Linnzeus.—Smooth and succulent; branched and leaning; leaflets five to eleven, usually seven to nine, mostly opposite, the terminal one lance-obovate, about an inch long; common petiole half an inch to two inches in length below the leaflets, slightly winged, pubescert-ciliate; corymbs few-flowered, nodding; corolla blue, about three times as long as the calyx; the lobes short, obovate, rounded. Capsule on a short stipe, in the enlarged, persistent, veined, green, and somewhat membranous calyx. (Dar- lington’s Flora Cestrica. See also Gray’s Manual of the Botany of the Northern United States, Chapman’s Alora of the Southern United States, and Wood's Class- Book of Botany.) HE Greek Valerians, known botanically as Polemonium, 3) form a genus of great interest to the American student, hand been selected by Jussieu, one of the chief founders of the natural system of Botany, as the type of the natural order /%ole- moniacee. The original Greek Valerian, Polemonium ceruleum, is a native of northern Europe and Asia; but it is also indige- nous to our own country, and by far the greater bulk’ of the whole order are American. Indeed, we may regard Polemoniacce as in the main an American order of plants. Botanists regard them as somewhat allied in structure to the Bind-weeds or Con- volvilacee—but they are very different in their aspect. On the other hand, they have much the general appearance of the flydrophyllacee or “water-leaf” family, but differ essentially in placentation, or manner in which the seeds are connected with the ovarium. In Polemoniacee the placenta is axile, while Hydrophyllacee it is central, in which case the seeds do not seem attached to the sides of the capsule, but to a soft mass in the centre. The two great genera of the eastern United States are JO POLEMONIUM REPTANS.—CREEPING GREEK VALERIAN. Phlox and Polemontum. Polemontum is readily distinguished from Phlox by its bell-shaped corolla, while, as is well known, the Phlox has its corolla mainly as a long slender tube. In regard to the history of the name, Polenzonium, the student may have some ground to complain of the text-books, as they so often have had to complain in similar cases. A French author of the last century says: “ Pliny tells us that many kings disputed the honor of having found the polemonum, which gave to the plant the name of Polemon, signifying war;” and Sir William J. Hooker tells us that “it was named from polemos, wav, accord- ing to Pliny this plant having caused a war between two kings who laid claim to its discovery.” The explanations read as if “this plant,” Polemonium ceruleum being in question, was the plant the “two” kings or the “many” kings fought over; but the plant is not a native of Greece, nor is it probable that Pliny had any knowledge whatever of “this plant,” and it is much better when inquiring why Tournefort called the plant Po/emo- gun, to say with Dr. Gray in the “Manual” “an ancient name of doubtful application.” And in his more recent “ Synoptical Flora of North America,” he even suggests that it is more prob- able Tournefort had in his mind to commemorate Polemon, the celebrated Athenian scholar, who succeeded Xenocrates in his famous school. The common name, Greek Valerian, is more easily traced. In older times, when the structure of plants was not well under- stood, groups were formed according to their external resem- blances. There is much in the habit of the genus to suggest the Valerian, and thus we find them in the writings of the old botan- ists. Dcedens, who wrote in 1616, calls it Valeriana greca, and Bauhin, thirty years later, Valeriana cerulea, though he takes occasion to remark that it “has nothing in common with the Valerian, except something in the shape of the leaves.” Finally taken from the Valerians, and given a separate name, Polemonium, by Tournefort, we can at least see exactly how it came by the name of Greek Valerian. POLEMONIUM REPTANS.—CREEPING GREEK VALERIAN. 71 The unfortunate confusion in the name results, as such seem- incly trifling mistakes often do, in errors of great consequence. The true Valerians have great medical virtues, perhaps great enough to warrant ancient kings fighting about them, and thus we find the old Herbalists, with Culpeper leading, assuring us that the “Greek Valerian is under Mercury, and is alexipharnic, -sudorific, and cephalic, and useful in malignant fevers and _pesti- lential distempers;” but as soon as it was proved not to be a Valerian, it was found that the virtues were wholly imaginary. Our species has been long known to botanists, being referred to by Gronovius in Clayton’s early collections from Virginia. It differs from the older known Polemontume ceruleum in its creep- ing habit, besides in other characters, and this characteristic suggested the name 7cf/ans, or “creeping Greek Valerian.” In Pennsylvania, where it is common in alluvial bottoms along rivers and water-courses, it is often called “Forget-me-not;” but as it has nothing in common with “The flower which has a flower as bright as noon, And leaf as delicate as softest satin, Called the Forget-me-not, but known as well By twenty names I cannot stop to tell,” as Sargent sings of it, it would be as well to let it drop. “Jacob's Ladder” is sometimes used because of its ladder-like leaf. It is well to refer to these names ina history of the plant; but “creeping Greek Valerian” will probably prevail. It is one of the earliest of our spring flowers, and brightens with a singular beauty the half-shady places wherein it loves to grow. Longfellow, in his beautiful poem, “Flowers,” scarcely had this plant in his mind when he wrote— “ Everywhere about us are they growing, Some like stars to tell us Spring is come; Others, their blue eyes with tears o’erflowing, Stand like Ruth among the golden corn; ” as the “blue eyes” of our speeies seldom if ever look at us from grain-fields; but as we may often see its beautiful sky-blue flow- 72 POLEMONIUM REPTANS.—CREEPING GREEK VALERIAN. ers, dotted with the pure white anthers growing along the Wis- sahickon, and telling us that “Spring is come,” there is a something impressive which invariably associates them with Longfellow's lines. It is a plant easily found by the lover of wild flowers, as it has a rather wide distribution in all the states east of the Mississippi except those in the extreme north-east, and those bordering on the Gulf of Mexico. The creeping Greek Valerian is a very easy plant to cultivate, and indeed it is when growing in the country gardens of Penn- sylvania that it generally receives the name of “ Forget-me-not.” A peculiarity of cultivation is that while the amount of foliage is increased, there is seldom any more increase in the quantity of flowers than we find in a wild state; so that a good strong stock in its native place of growth seems more beautiful than one growing in a garden. In cultivation, however, we find more variety in the shades of color, as they happen to be selected by those who bring them in from their wild locations. It is not uncommon to find flowers of a brighter blue than we have selected for our plate. On the other hand, they are often seen of a pure white. In any condition the plant would be regarded as pretty, and will bear a strict scrutiny in regard to some claim to beauty. The general tendency in the habit of growth is towards straight, slender lines, without any great variety in length or direction—but the roundish fowers make a fair con- trast to the straight lines, and the gentle curve caused by the weight of the flowers expresses unity in the general effect. Still, it must be admitted that its claim to be a pretty flower lies chiefly in the contrast which the blue makes with the white anthers. J sarbenee Spiess CYPRIPEDIUM PUBESCENS. LARGE YELLOW MOCCASIN FLOWER. NATURAL ORDER, ORCHIDACE. CYPRIPEDIUM PUBESCENS, Willdenow.—Stem leafy, leaves broad-lanceolate, acuminate; sepals lanceolate; lip shorter than the linear, twisted petals, compressed laterally, convex both above and below; sterile stamen triangular, acute; plant pubescent. Stems usually sev- eral from the same root, one foot or more high. Leaves three to six inches long by two to three wide, many-veined, clasping at the base. Flower mostly solitary. Segments four, greenish with purple stripes and spots, the lower bifid, composed of two united sepals, the lateral two to three inches long by three lines wide, wavy and twisted. Lip moccasin- shaped, bright yellow, spotted inside, with a roundish aperture. (Wood's Class- Book of Botany. See also Gray’s Afanual of the Botany of the Northern United States, and Chapman’s Flora of the Southern United States.) HE large yellow is one of the best known of the Moc- a kA casin Flowers; and yet there are interesting facts con- nected with it that do not seem to be well known to botanists, or at least are not noted in the descriptions some of them give. These little facts, however, teach the student some interesting les- sons, and it is chiefly because Professor Wood has noted some of these that we have selected for our chapter the description from his work. For instance, we read in most accounts of our species that the flowers are bright yellow, that the petals are linear and twisted, and that the lateral sepals are of such a given width; and the student is liable to suppose that nature has an exact character for her species, whereas her limits are clastic, and we may almost always look for some variations from even the best written descriptions without any ground for imagining we have a new species because the plant in question and the most popular description do not exactly correspond. Our present illustration of the large yellow Moccasin Flower will be found 74 CYPRIPEDIUM PUBESCENS,—LARGE YELLOW MOCCASIN FLOWER. to vary somewhat from many descriptions, and from some of the drawings of which there have been quite a number given during the past century. For instance, the sepals—which are the two external portions forming the upward and downward back portion of the flower—are scarcely wavy. nor are the two narrower portions (petals) in front, and on each side of the “moccasin” or lip ; again, the flower is not “ bright” yellow in our specimen, and there is a faint trace of white on the upper portion of the “foot.” The reader knows that all these parts of the flower were originally designed by nature to be ordinary green leaves, and that it was only by a subsequent change of plan that she altered them into sepals, petals, and other floral parts; and it is interesting to note that when she goes to work on this change of leaves to flowers, she generally carries along some peculiarities especially belonging to the leaves. Now in the usual forms of the large yellow Moccasin Flower which we meet with, we find the leaves very much undulated, botanically speaking, or, as we may Say, with wavy and twisted margins; and it is in the cases where they are the most waved that we have the greatest twisting of the floral segments. In our speci- men, where we see little twisting of these parts, we have cor- respondingly less waviness in the leaf margins. It is a very interesting example of the correspondence of character in the leaves, and in the floral parts which have been made from the leaves, though in so many other particulars they have been led to diverge from each other. ; The large yellow Moccasin Flower is very closely allied to the Cypripedium Calccolus of Europe, which gave the name of “Lady Slipper” to the family; and by this name the botanical Cypripedium was suggested to Linneus. Indeed, the earlier American botanists wrote of our plant as being the same, and as C Calceolus it is referred to in some of their writings. It may, therefore, lay claim to a share in whatever of popular his- tory relates to that species. In the past ages, when everything common was invested with religious associations, we find the CYPRIPEDIUM PUBESCENS.—LARGE YELLOW MOCCASIN FLOWER. 75 Lady’s Slipper written of as “our Lady’s Slipper,” and to this day the popular names in France are “ Sabot de Ja Vierge” and “Soulier de Notre Dame,” names having the same signification. It is interesting to note how very much our knowledge of plants has increased in modern times, and especially our knowledge of the structure of orchids—the family to which Cypripedium belongs. One of the earliest of American botanists, Dr. Cadwal- lader Colden, of New York, writing, about 1744, to the cele- brated Gronovius, remarks of Cypripedium, “two stamina seem not sufficient to me to impregnate the great quantity of seed con- tained in the capsule.” Now we know that a mass of pollen is made up of innumerable grains, every one of which is equal to the fertilization of a single ovule. It is believed that the flowers can be pollenized only by the aid of insects, and it is remarkable that a plant is rarely found which has flowered and not perfected seed, and yet again it is singular that insects are rarely seen visiting the flowers. Dr. Asa Gray, who once made a special study of these plants with a view to ascertain their relation to insects, notes that though he found insect traces he was never able to detect the insects actually at work. The chapter of these remarkable circumstances, however, is not yet complete, for we have to note that the seeds are very small, and that an immense number are produced in each capsule, while notwithstanding the trouble nature seems to have taken to arrange that seed shall only follow the visits of insects to the flowers, scarcely any of these seeds grow. We may note a group of a few dozen plants in any one place, and for years afterwards, with little increase in number in all that time. So rare is it that we have any evidence of seeds of these plants growing in their native places, that Dr. Jonathan Stokes, the botanist of the olden time, after whom our Svokesza is named, was led to exclaim that “Gardeners might make the botanists amends for rooting out these rare wild plants in their natural places of growth and at the same time enrich themselves, if they would prove by experiment that one at least of the orchis tribe 76 CYPRIPEDIUM PUBESCENS.—LARGE YELLOW MOCCASIN FLOWER. could be raised from seed.” By very nice care the tropical epiphytal, or tree-loving kinds, have been raised from seed—but we kelieve Dr. Stokes’ remarks have vet much force so far as the natural growth of these hardy orchids from seeds is con- cerned. Of the large yellow Cypripedium great numbers of plants are annually shipped to Europe by dealers, and for want of nature filling the gap by new seedlings, the species is now rarely found where florists have a chance to dig up the roots. Our specimen was furnished for drawing by Messrs. Hoopes Bros. & Thomas of West Chester, Pennsylvania, who report that it was a root received from Massachusetts. In Pennsylvania it lowers in May, and grows in rather moist, bushy places, or in open woods. Farther north it is found as late as June. It is met with in most of the Northern States as far west as Minnesota, and southward to Kentucky and Georgia. RIA LA MARGINATA Pate 19. FUPHORBIA MARGINATA., SNOW ON THE MOUNTAIN. NATURAL ORDER, EUPHORBIACE/E. EUPHORBIA MARGINATA, Pursh.—Leaves oblong-lanceolate, sub-cordate, sessile, acute, mucro- nate, entire on the margin, glabrous; umbel three-rayed, once or twice dichotomous; involucrate leaves oblong, colored and membranaceous at the margin; inner segments of the floral involucre roundish ; capsule hairy-pubescent. (Wood’s Class-Book of Botany.) OME of the plants now recognized as Euphorbia were also known to the ancients, and references to them occur in some of the oldest writings extant. The genus com- prises an immense number of species; and yet, as intelligent men penetrate unexplored portions of the globe, they occa- sionally find new kinds to add to the already large list. Great numbers of them prefer hot and dry places, and so as what are called the deserts of our country became explored, and plants not known before were discovered, new Euphorbias of all others would be likely to be found among them. In the early part of the present century very little was known of the plants growing beyond the Mississippi or the Missouri. It was not until 1814 when Pursh issued in London his work on the “ Flora of North. America,” that we had any knowledge of the flowers of this part of our country, and it is in this work that our present subject was first named and described, But though the credit of estab- lishing the name may be given to Pursh under botanical rules, it does not follow that he was the original collector of the plants he wrote of. He was never beyond the Mississippi river, and he was indebted to the expedition of Lewis and Clarke for much of his material. Some of the dried specimens of this expedition fell into his hands, and were used by him for his (77) 78 EUPHORBIA MARGINATA.—SNOW ON THE MOUNTAIN. work. Reference is made to this fact in order to furnish a lesson in Botanical Geography. The home, as we may say, of our plant about fifty years ago, was in the drier parts of our country, between the Missouri and the Rocky Mountains. Since that time it has progressed eastward rapidly, and it is more than probable that at no very distant date it will be found wild up to the shores of the Atlantic Ocean. Professor Wood, from whose “Class Book” we have taken our description, notes, in 1861, that it was wild abundantly on the shores of the Kentucky river, at Paris, in Kentucky State. In 1872, Pro- fessor Bessey notes, in the “American Naturalist” for that year, that it was then in great abundance in west and northwestern Iowa, and Mr. Arthur includes it now in the regular catalogue of the Flora of that state; and in the “Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club” for 1876, we find Mr. R. Burgess noting that it was abundant along the Missouri valley in Missouri. In regard to Indiana, notice of its existence is recorded, so early as 1870 in the “ Botanical Gazette,” as abundant at Madison; and the same season its first appearance at Logansport is recorded in the same magazine. This shows how it is marching on to the acquisition of more territory, and as of course only one plant can exist on the same spot, other species of plants are eventu- ally crowded out by the intruders. But it is quite probable that the plant did not exist in any great abundance, even in its natural home, till civilized man came to its aid. It does not flourish remarkably well when struggling with the regular flora of the same region; but when the railroad was made and the earth in various ways disturbed, the plant appeared in such abundance, that the untutored observers thought it must have sprung from seed that had lain in the ground dormant for cen- turies. But the facts in these and similar cases are that a few plants spring from chance seeds, and, being so few, produce seeds unobserved; these seeds falling on soil just suited to them nearly all grow, and then by their unusually large num- bers attract attention. It has in this way become particularly EUPHORBIA MARGINATA.—SNOW ON THE MOUNTAIN. 79 attractive to the traveller over these far western railroads, as it is in its best dress only along the lines where the soil has been disturbed. Mr. James Vick, the well-known florist, and enthusiastic admirer of flowers, passing over one of these railroads across Kansas soon after its opening, was struck by its novel appear- ance, and thus wrote home about it: “This Luphorbca mar- ginata is a very pretty annual, making a plant, in the newly dis- turbed soil, of nearly two feet in height, and having the appear- ance of a shrub or a miniature tree. The largest of the leaves are nearly two inches in length, growing smaller as they approach the tops of the branches. The leaves are of a very pretty light green, surrounded by a margin of clear snowy white, on the large leaves merely a line, becoming wider as the leaves get smaller, until the smallest are nearly or quite pure white, as are also the flower bracts. It grows abundantly, and is called by the people here ‘Snow on the Mountain,’ and we thought this a very appropriate name.” ‘The florist is not alone in paying trib- ute to its natural beauty ; even the botanist often pauses to express his admiration of that element in this flower, though beauty has no recognized place in his systems of classifications. Thus Mr. Burgess, in the note already referred to, speaks of the dazzling splendor of certain plants growing over the “rarely carved Bluffs,” among which he especially notes our plant as “strug- gling up the side, over the summit at last!” The “Botanical Gazette,” “It seemed to make its appearance quite suddenly at Madison a in speaking of its existence at Madison, Indiana, says: few years ago, but is spreading with wonderful rapidity, covering only such hills and parts of hills as have been cleared of timber, and are covered with sand or gravel. It ranges over many acres of the hilly ground, and is creeping slowly to the level ground. Its milky juice is very abundant, and may some day yield in its gum, to investigating industry, an ample return for its cultivation. Those who have occasion, however, to handle it, had better not do so with abraded skin, and should be careful not to convey any 80 EUPHORBIA MARGINATA.—SNOW ON THE MOUNTAIN. to the mouth, as the principle Euphorbin is exceedingly irritating in minute quantities, and may be fatal in large portions.” Since its introduction to our gardens its singular beauty has been recognized by florists, and it often enters into the artistic floral work known as “bedding,” or the growing of plants in large masses with regard to their harmonies of color. It is quite likely that in time some varieties may be discovered which will give an increased floral interest to this beautiful plant. Even in nature some variations from the normal form are found at times, and a very striking one is referred to in Engelmann and Gray’s account of Lindheimer’s Texan collections. This one is described as having the broad white margin often more or less crisped. This variety they name Euphorbia marginata variety woleuca, and if its peculiar crispy character could be developed it would be highly prized by florists. PLATE 20) ASPIDIUM FRAGRANS. L. PRANG & COMPANY, Boston SERIES IL Vou. L ASPIDIUM FRAGRANS. SWEET SHIELD-FERN. NATURAL ORDER, FILICES, ASPIDIUM FRAGRANS, Swartz.—Fronds four to twelve inches high, glandular and aromatic, nar- rowly lanceolate, with linear-oblong pinnately-parted pinnee; their crowded divisions oblong, obtuse, toothed or nearly entire, nearly covered beneath with the very large, thin, imbricated indusia, which are orbicular with a narrow sinus, the margin sparingly glandu- liferous and often ragged. (Gray’s AJanual of the Botany of the Northern Unitea States. See also Wood’s Class- Book of Botany, and Eaton's Ferns of North America.) ; ) and the genera and species have a certain general resemblance to each other, so that few can be mistaken in their relationship. Thus those who know little of botany as a science can usually tell a fern when they see it, and can understand by this what a botanist means when he speaks of any particular family of vlants as being a very natural one. From this particular sameness in the general aspects of ferns, one might suppose that little could be said of each species in detail. In common language one might imagine that a “fern was merely a fern, and nothing more ;” but in truth beneath this general uniformity of dress lies a great variety of character, and the lessons we may derive from each species are almost as numerous as we might gather from the study of individual human beings. Weare often told of the lessons we may learn from flowers; but the lessons from plants which have no proper flowers, as ferns have not, are no less inviting. In some respects they have advantages which flowering plants have not, for often a flowering plant possesses but little interest to the average botanist when it is not in bloom, while the fern is generally inter- 6 (81) 82 ASPIDIUM FRAGRANS.— SWEET SHIELD-FERN. esting to him at all seasons, for a fertile plant will frequently fur- nish specimens “in fruit” during most of the summer season, and in some cases long after the wild woods have lost their autumn foliage, and present in the language of the poet Winter— “ Bare, ruined choirs where late the sweet birds sang,” may the botanical inquirer find all he wants to know in the lingering fronds of some hardy fern. Our present species, Aspidium fragrans, is particularly rich in lessons, both as to its historical relationships and in the many points which are essentially its own. Until comparatively recent times it was supposed to be wholly an Old World fern. It has been long known to European botanists, and was described by Linnzeus now much over a century ago as Polypodium fragrans. It was first found in the United States by Dr. C. C. Parry, the botanist attached to Owen’s Geological Survey of Wisconsin, Iowa and Minnesota in 1852. In the Report of this Survey, Dr. Parry says he found this fern on the Trap Rocks, near the Falls of St. Croix, and he remarks “the whole fern is beset with fragrant glandular hairs. It grows in dense tufts, in the shaded crevices of trap rocks, with the withered remains of several years’ growth still adhering. The fronds are of a deep greén color above, paler below, four to nine inches high. The aroma is permanent and agreeable. I am informed by Dr. Torrey that this species has never before been found within the limits of the United States, but has been obtained in British America and Kam- schatka, where it is used for making tea. In the locality here specified, it is quite abundant.” Since 1852 it has been found in many other parts of the Union bounding the Canadian territory, as for instance in Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire and New York. New locations are occasionally yet found for it, and the possibility of finding it where it has never been met with before gives zest to the plant collector who may be on botanical excur- sions through the Northern States. The natural situation where it may be found is well suggested in the extract from Dr. ASPIDIUM FRAGRANS. —SWEET SHIELD-FERN. 8 3 Parry’s report. One of the more recent discoverers, Mr. C. G. Pringle, who saw it growing on Mount Mansfield, Vermont, in a letter to the writer under date of April 13, 1879, gives so excel- lent a description of how the plant appears in its native home that we are tempted to quote it here: “In the several stations of Aspidium fragrans among the Green Mountains, which I have explored, the plant is always seen growing from the crevices or on the narrow shelves of dry cliffs—not often such cliffs as are exposed to the sunlight, unless it be on the summits of the mountains, but usually such cliffs as are shaded by firs, and notably such as overhang mountain rivulets and waterfalls. When I visit such places in summer, the niches occupied by the plants are quite dry. I think it would be fatal to the plant if much spray should fall on it during the season of its active growth. When you enter the shade and solitude of the haunts of this fern its presence is betrayed by its resinous odor: looking up the face of the cliff, usually mottled with lichens and moss, you see it often far above your reach hanging against the rock, masses of dead brown fronds, the accumulations of many years, preserved by the resinous principle which pervades them; for the fronds as they disport regularly about the elongating caudex, fall right and left precisely like a woman’s hair. Above the tuft of drooping dead fronds which radiate from the centre of the plant, grow from six to twenty green fronds, which represent the growth of the season, those of the preceding year dying towards autumn.” Its filical companions in this locality are Cystopteris fragilis, Polypodium vulgare, and IWoodsia [lvensis. The observations of Dr. Parry and Mr. Pringle not only interest us in the pen-picture of the home of our sweet-scented shield-fern, but will be very useful to those who desire to cul- tivate it. It has been under culture in English gardens since 1820, and is still popular with the hardy fern growers there, not- withstanding the influx of new favorites. A writer on hardy cultivated ferns in the Gardener's Chronicle for February 8, 1879, says it is regarded there as “a charming little species, very sweet- 84 ASPIDIUM FRAGRANS.—SWEET SHIELD-FERN. scented, Planted in a select position it will do very well indeed.” The tea made from the leaves is referred to by various authors as very agreeable, and Professor Eaton says some writers have compared the fragrance of the plant to that of raspberries. Our space will not permit of an extended analysis of its more purely botanical points of interest. From Lolypodium fragrans it was made Aspidium fragrans by Swartz in 1771; and this is generally followed by American authors, though it will be found as Lastrea jragrans in most English works. Various authors speak of it as Nephrodium, or Polystichum. It varies much in the forms and characters of its fronds, as indeed we must pre- pare ourselves to expect with most species of ferns. In specimens before us from Alaska collected by W. W. Harrington on Dall's exploring expedition of 1871 and 1872, the main rachis and those of the divisions of the frond are slender and hair-like, while Wisconsin specimens of Hale and Lapham have a very coarse and heavy look. Our illustration from a specimen growing under the care of Mr. Jackson Dawson, of the Arnold Arboretum, Mass., shows a fair average form. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—1. A plant divested of its old nest-like leaves. 2. A pinnule very much enlarged. 3. Portion of the under side of a pinnule, showing the remark- ably scaly rachis. 4. A lobe very much enlarged, showing the indusium as well charac- terized in Dr, Gray’s description, and also the resinous dots. PLATE 2], sk tay, . cesar A anata ARE NO é oll ett . ERIGERON BELLIDIPOLIUM, POOR ROBIN’S PLANTAIN. NATURAL ORDER, COMPOSITE. ERIGERON BELLIDIFOLIUM, Muhlenberg.—Rays crowded and rather conspicuous; purplish, Plant hoary-villous; stem simple and few-leaved ; leaves spatulate and lance-oblong; heads large, few, corymbose; rays broadish. Perennial; stoloniferous. Stem nine to eighteen inches high. Radical leaves one to three inches long, spatulate and obovate, contracted to amargined petiole; stem leaves sub-serrate; the upper ones entire or denticulate, some- what clasping. Heads of flowers two to three, or five (rarely seven. or nine) in a loose terminal corymb,—the lower peduncles axillary, long and flaccid; rays pale bluish-purple ; achenes smooth. (Darlington’s Flora Cestrica. See also Gray’s Flora of the Northern United States, Chapman’s Flora of the Southern United States, and Wood's Class- Book of Botany.) : R. DARLINGTON, from whose work we have taken our description, the drawings being made from a Pennsyl- vania plant growing near to where he wrote, gives “ Flea-bane” as one of the common names of the genus, and so do most of our Botanical Text-books; while some authors speak of our plant as the “ Daisy-leaved”’ and “Early-flowering” Flea-bane. The plant, however, has very little relation to the true Flea-bane; and in examining the reasons for the appellation, we learn a valuable lesson as to the making and perpetuation of errors, when the care to be strictly accurate which we endeavor to exercise in preparing “The Native Flowers and Ferns” is not taken. Green tells us that the name of Blue Flea-bane was unfortu- nately given to the £77geron acre by “some English botanists, which thus tends to confound it with Conyza.” And of Conyza sguamosa the old herbalists say, “the juice of the whole plant cures the itch, by external application, and the very smell of the herb is said to destroy fleas.” Both of these are European 86 ERIGERON BELLIDIFOLIUM.—POOR ROBIN’S PLANTAIN, plants. We see that the mere accident of some general appear- ance in the flower led some botanists into calling that species “Blue Flea-bane ;” and our botanists, with far less excuse, left the “ Blue” off. and gave the common name of the Conyza, Flea- bane, to the whole genus Ey7geron. So far 2s the writer of this can learn, the name of “Flea-bane” was never used by the people of the United States for these plants until it was employed in botanical works, and very rarely if at all now, which renders the introduction of the misleading name into our literature the more unpardonable. Even the common name for this species, “Poor Robin's Plantain,’ has been modified by botanists in various ways. Sims, in the “ Botanical Magazine,” many years ago, figured it, and says: “It grows from North Carolina to Canada, where it is known as ‘Poor Robin’s Plantain.’” Dr. Gray, in “School Botany,” cuts it down to “Robin’s Plantain,” Prof. Wood to “Robins’ Plantain,’ and Dr. Darlington “Poor Robert's Plantain.” The origin of the com- mon name is not clear; but if ever the occasion should arise to make an investigation important, the student would prob- ably be misled by these careless alterations in the orthography of the names. The specific name, dc//rdifolium, was suggested by Dr. Muh- lenberg in a letter to Willdenow, who adopted it in the de- scription of the plant in his “Species Plantarum.” It signifies having a leaf like the Lelis perennis or English daisy, though there is no very close resemblance. The best that can be said is that it is perhaps more nearly like the leaf of that popular English flower than the leaves of other species are. A peculiarity of the genus Zrigeron is to have a large number of ray florets, and in this respect the whole family has a resemblance to the daisy, and our present species may carry the association closer to this great national favorite, because like it the earliest spring meets its opening flowers. It is the first of all the Ameri- can Exigerons to bloom. We may say of it as Burns said to his “ Mountain daisy:” ERIGERON BELLIDIFOLIUM.— POOR ROBIN'S PLANTAIN, 87 “ Cold blew the bitter-biting north Upon thy humble birth; Yet cheerfully thou venturest forth Amid the storm, Scarce reared above the earth Thy tender form.” The writer has: gathered flowers of this daisy-like species among the snow in a late spring. The generic name, Evigeron, according to Milne, is “ from ey, the spring, and geron, the Greek name for senecio; that is, a senecio which flowers in spring.” It may be observed that gevoz really means an old man, as its Lat- inized form sezecto does—from sezex, old,—and this is in allusion to the copious white pappus often in globose masses like a head of white silken hair. But Z77gerons do not all bloom in spring. There is another species, LZrigeron Philadelphicum, which is very closely allied to this, one of the chief differences being that while our present subject is often in bloom by the end of April, and is rarely found in blossom after June, the £. Philadelphicum does not commence to open its flowers till June, and often continues till August at least in Pennsylvania. The creeping runners or stolons (Fig. 3) also distinguish this species, the £. Philadct- phicum always having a tufted root stock. While on this sub- ject of botanical differences, it may be noted that in many genera of composite plants it is very easy to distinguish one from another by something in its aspect which is very hard to define in words. ‘The practised collector can almost always tell an Erigeron when he meets with it for the first time, the very large number of ray florets being in a great measure a character- istic. Yet the botanist, when he comes to analyze the struc- ture closely, finds it difficult to tell how to distinguish it from an Aster, a Diplopappus or some of the other neighboring genera. Some of the species, indeed, have a double pappus, as in the last- named genus, especially those which bloom in the fall season, about the time when Diplopappus is generally found, and in these cases the appendages of the style, shorter and blunter than in Diplopappus, form all beyond the “popular aspect” that is relied 2 88 ERIGERON BELLIDIFOLIUM.—POOR ROBIN’S PLANTAIN. on to distinguish it. There are numerous species in the United States, abounding chiefly in the higher regions, but the popular aspect referred to characterizes them all. Our species is one of the most frequently met with in the Eastern States. It is not particularly confined to open meadows, though often found there. “ But this bold floweret climbs the hill, Hides in the forest, haunts the glen, Plays cn the margin of the rill, Peeps round the fox’s den”? — as Montgomery says of its celebrated English ally. It is almost impossible for the average collector to make very exten- sive journeys in spring time without meeting it. Very often it forms thick patches many yards in extent, keeping down most other vegetation, by its creeping stems—and then its bluish-pur- ple flowers give a peculiar feature to the spring vegetation even when seen from long distances. Beyond its spring beauty—though that is no mean element of usefulness—the “ Poor Robin's Plantain” has not made for itself much of a name in the service of man. Rafinesque, one of the most industrious authors in the early part of the present century, gives a special chapter to the medical virtues of the Z. Philaded- fhicum, and seems to include our species, which he calls “the Daisy Flea-bane, a Vernal Vernil,” amongst others, when he says: “They were known to the Northern Indians by the name of Cocash or Squaw-weed as menagogue and diuretics.” As a styptic he thinks “they have saved many lives.” It is extremely useful when applied to wounds and tumors. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—1. A plant from Pennsylvania taken in May, 2. Upper por- tion of flower stalk. 3. Runners which later in the season form new plants at their ends, SLATE 99. PINGUICULA LU'TBA “ar. 1K PINGUICULA LUTEA, YELLOW BUTTERWORT NATURAL ORDER, LENTIBULARIACE, PINGUICULA LUTEA, Walter.—Leaves from ovate to oblong-ovate, an inch or two long; scapes five to twelve inches high; corolla an inch or less long; the lobes longer than the short- campanulate tube with the saccate base, all or the lower and lateral usually four-lobed or two-cleft with the divisions obcordate, or variously sinuate: spur subulate, as long as the sac and tube; palate oblong, very salient, densely bearded. (Gray’s Synoptical Flora of North America. See also Wood's Class-Book of Botany, and Chapman’s flora of the Southern United States.) T is always interesting to know the origin of names, and 3} their meaning; not so much because it is any great Bula to the knowledge of the plant itself, as that it keeps us from error, and this is equal to knowledge. In connection with our present subject we may note that the long known species of Europe, Pinguicula vulgaris, among its numerous English names was known as the “ Yorkshire Sanicle;” and, misguided by this name, a popular English medical oor of the last century—the “Botanalogia” by Salmon—figures the Sanzcula Europea for the true “ Butterwort” which is the old Pixguicula. It is possible that there may be a similar misconception as to the origin of the generic name Pinguzcula. All our text-books tell us that it is from fugues, Latin for fat, “the leaves being mostly greasy to the touch, whence the name.” But there is nothing particularly greasy in the appearance or feel of the European Butterwort more than in other familiar plants to suggest to the common people any such special name for it. The botanical name, Pengurcula, seems to have been first used by Conrad Gesner, of Zurich, in Switzerland, who published in gO PINGUICULA LUTEA.—YELLOW BUTTERWORT. Basil, in 1541, a history of plants. It had long been known as “Butterwort” by the English, and it would be quite natural for the common name to suggest the botanical one, and “ Pingui- cula” would regularly follow. But “ Butterwort” does not seem to have been derived from the greasy feel of the leaves, but from the power possessed by the plant of rapidly turning cream into butter. Linnzeus observed that the soft white hair which covered the leaf secreted a glutinous fluid. These glutinous leaves were put by the inhabitants of northern Europe into a sieve, and then the fresh milk of the reindeer passed through, and in a day or so afterwards it became a firm buttery mass. This butter was a popular article of diet with the Swedes, and it is as fair a deduction that a plant which actually made butter, should thereby earn the name of “ butterwort,” or butterplant, as that it comes from the leaves having a greasy feel which might suggest any oily, greasy feel, as well as that derived from butter. Moreover, old Gerarde, one of the earliest writers on English gardening, calls the plant “ Butter-root,” which he would scarcely do, if the “butter” was simply in relation to the greasy feel of the leaves. Asa rule, it would be just as well if names meant nothing; but when they are supposed to be connected with the history of the plant, it becomes important that the history should be scrupulously correct. It may be noted here that Gesner supposed the European Prngiicu/a was the plant referred to by Pliny as Dodecatheon, but this name was subsequently transferred by Linnaus to an American genus of plants having little relation to this. Pinguicula has become a plant of more than usual interest since Mr. Darwin discovered that the acrid excretion of the leaves catches insects and in a manner digests them. Besides that, a considerable amount of motion is exercised by the leaves when catching insects. Mr. Darwin noticed that the glands secreted much more freely when excited by touch; and the leaves which had the glands the most sensitive in this respect were those which exhibited the most motion. The motion is, however, PINGUICULA LUTEA.—YELLOW BUTTERWORT. gt very slow. It is simply the incurving of the leaf over the insects, seeds, or other objects caught; and occupied about fifteen hours under Mr. Darwin's observation. It thus appears that the motion has no direct relation to insect-catching, for they are caught and held long before by the viscid glands; but Mr. Darwin found that the greater the number of glands that could apply their secretions to the insects caught, the more rapidly did digestion go on, and this motion, therefore, appears rather as an aid in nutrition than as a mere insect-catching power as in some plants. Mr. Darwin closes a lengthy but highly interesting paper on his experiences with the common Pingicula by remarking, “we may therefore conclude that with its small roots it is not only supported to a large extent by the extraordinary number of insects which it habitually captures, but likewise draws some nourishment from the pollen, leaves, and seeds of other plants, which often adhere to its leaves. It is therefore partly a vegetable as well as an animal feeder.” It is well worth while to inform ourselves of these wonderful dis- coveries of Mr. Darwin in connection with the old world plants, because it is more than likely that some highly interesting obser- vations may be made on other species, of which there are some half a dozen natives of the United States, and especially on the one we have now before us, the “Yellow Butterwort.” Its leaves are also clammy-pubescent; and, as will be seen by our plate, it has the remarkably disproportionate roots to leaves so specially noted by Mr. Darwin as a reason why the leaves should aid in the direct nutrition of the plant. In this way it may yet make a history for itself, towards which, so far, it has done little. All that it has yet contributed is the fact, that it is one of the pretty spring-flowers which give such a charm to the early season of the southern United States. Mr. A. P. Garber tells us in a sketch of early southern flowers, in the first volume of the “Botanical Gazette,’ that it was one of the first that greeted him on landing at Palatka, Florida, on the 16th of Feb- ruary; and Mrs. Mary Treat, to whom, through Professor Sar- g2 PINGUICULA LUTEA.—YELLOW BUTTERWORT. gent, of Cambridge, Mass., we are indebted for the specimen from which our drawing was made, reports that it is one of the most beautiful of the early floral attractions of that State. Other observers from further northward report that it often grows in immense patches in rather sandy places, especially in the Pine barrens, where, in March, it forms. brilliant golden sheets of bloom. Its favorite situation seems to be in locations rather damp than dry. To botanists it is an old acquaintance, having been noted by Walter, who published a “ Flora of Carolina,” in 1788. Lamarck, in 1792, named it Pinguicula campandlata, but the prior name of Walter's, under botanical rules, is the accepted one. Beyond this it has no synonyms of importance, though Professor Gray notes that it probably has some varieties. The natural order to which it belongs, Lentibulariacee, is a very small one, containing scarcely half a dozen genera, of which Utricularia and our present genus constitute the most important representatives. The name Lentibulariacee is derived from what was once the genus Lezéebularta, but which has since been absorbed by Utricularia, the well-known and _ curious “ Bladderwort.” Our artist has presented the flowers in so many aspects that a detailed explanation is scarcely necessary. Fig. 2 shows the two-lipped character of the calyx when divested of the corolla, but this also appears from the back view of one of the expanded flowers. SOSTCN VQOMiPANL RANG ANEMONE VIRGINIANA. TALL ANEMONE.—THIMBLE-WEED. NATURAL ORDER, RANUNCULACEZ. ANEMONE VIRGINIANA, L.—Hairy; principal involucre three-leaved, the leaves long-petioled, three-parted; their divisions ovate-lanceolate, pointed, cut-serrate, the lateral two-parted, the middle three-cleft; peduncles elongated, the earliest naked, the others with a two- leaved involucel at the middle; sepals five, acute, greenish, in one variety white and obtuse; head of fruit oval or oblong. (Gray’s AfZanual of the Botany of the Northern United States. See also Chapman’s Flora of the Southern United States, and Wood's Class-Book of Botany.) , iT is scarcely possible to have an Anemone brought to our 2329 notice, but the many poetical and other pleasant asso- ciations which have been connected with it through so many ages crowd themselves on our attention. A large volume might be devoted wholly to the polite history of the Azemone. All we can do in a few pages like ours is to refer to some of the most prominent circumstances that have been connected with the family. Few would believe that any of the. pretty species which form the genus, and which have had so many pleasant stories founded on their innocent-looking little flowers, ever were in ill- favor with mankind; and yet the ancient inhabitants of Eastern Europe believed that the wind was poisoned by passing over a field of Azemones, and that severe maladies followed those who had to breathe in this poisoned atmosphere; and this belief exists among the common people of those lands even down to our time. For this reason the Persians have taken an Anemone to be the emblem of sickness, yet few of those who write of the “language of flowers” know how the association originated. The Romans appear to have had some such an idea, but believed (93) 94 ANEMONE VIRGINIANA. —THIMBLE-WEED. they had the power to propitiate the evil spirit ruling the Anemone. Hence, the first Anemones of the year were eagerly looked for, and were gathered with spell-words and ceremonies, and after such propitiations the flower was supposed to be a special safeguard against malarious diseases and pestilences. However, almost, if not all, that appears in either ancient or modern history of the Avemone, refers to some early spring flowering kind; while the one we now have before us is rather the child of summer, for it commences to bloom in June, and continues till August. An anonymous poet tells us that, “ Thickly strewn in woodland bowers, Anemones their Stars unfold.” But again, in situation as in blooming time, this does not refer to our present species, for it does not bloom in shaded places, but along fences and the borders of woods where it can receive the protection of some dry leaves for its roots during the winter season, and yet have the advantage of the full sunlight for its leaves and flowers. To those who admire floral nature, it seldom appears as a very remarkable element in the beauty of the scene, for it lacks the gay colors which usually attract us. Indeed it seems litthe more than an ordinary coarse weed, Yet few go out to collect wild flowers in the places where this may be found without having it among their trophies, and this alone shows that there is something about it worthy of thought, if not of admiration. And there is, indeed; for some very valuable botanical lessons may be derived from it. In many Anemones the leaves on the stems have been so altered, that they scarcely look like leaves. In some instances they are drawn so close to the flower that, in their altered condition, they appear like parts of the inflorescence and are regarded as involucres, which may be considered a part of the floral envelope, a grade lower than a calyx. So much changed from true leaves have been the involucres of many of the ANEMONE VIRGINIANA, —THIMBLE-WEED. 95 European forms, that disquisitions on their real nature have been made by distinguished botanists. In the “Journal of the Proceed- ings of the Linnzean Society, of London,” for 1860, Mr. George Bentham suggests that the involucre of Anemone was, originally, but a single leaf clasping the stem; and Professor Asa Gray takes occasion in “Silliman’s Journal,” of May, in that year, to show from the well-developed involucral leaves of Anemone Virginiana, here illustrated, what their real nature is. But we may pursue our studies further in the same direction. We may learn from our present species, how closely related all the parts of a plant are, and see very easily how one part is transformed from another part. We must imagine first that our plant may have had a branching character to a much greater extent than it possesses now. ‘The five petals may have been leaves just as fully developed as the three “involucral”’ leaves in our plate but for a greater arresting power of development at that point, in which case the central portion, now stamens and pistils, would have been extended to another flower-stem, and there would have been five axillary buds at the base of each of these five involucral leaves. Just this process has occurred as we can trace in the picture; except there were but three axillary buds there, and but three leaves. In the arrestation of the central stem, the three axillary buds were not transformed, but made an attempt to develop into branches, only again to be arrested by the reproductive force. In this case the whole growth is weakened, and we see was not powerful enough to take more than two nodes into its rhythmic grasp, making but two involucral leaves,—and these again so weak that no further axial buds could be developed. We gather, therefore, that very slight variations of the rhythmic force connected with the laws of acceleration and retardation make all the differences in struc- ture; and we can understand how very easily one form or species may be evolved from another one. Indeed, we often meet with variations in the normal growth of our present species which want nothing but permanence to be regarded good 96 ANEMONE VIRGINIANA. —THIMBLE-WEED. specific characters. On one occasion, the writer found a specimen in which the central flower was stalkless, or sessile. In this case it had but three petals, and these were protruded between the three flower-stalks growing from the flower’s base, and which, as we have already seen, are transformed branches from three axil- lary buds. By this lesson we can comprehend why the middle stalk has no leaves, or involucels, as the three laterals have. If it were to have them, they would have to be formed of the five leaves now used to make the sepals. Lesquereaux tells us that in Arkansas the species is known as “Tall Anemone,” and this indeed is a very characteristic name ; the plant growing in many cases from two to three feet high. Darby says in his “ Botany of the Southern States,” that in that section of the country it is known as “ Thimble-weed,” the name obviously derived from its almost mature head, which, in many cases, has a very thimble-like appearance both in form and marking. It is found somewhat frequently in most of the eastern part of our territory, from Canada to South Carolina, being, however, most at home in the northern latitudes, where it has travelled completely across the continent. The color as usually seen is greenish ; but forms have been found with pure white flowers, and a judicious selection might reward the florist with showy improvements. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—1. Upper portion of a flower-stalk, made from a Pennsyl- vania specimen in July. 2. The central branch arrested to form a flower-stalk with its naked peduncle. 3. Axillary branches, finally bearing each a sealer flower-stalk. ode Axillary Jeaves, transformed to involucre and involucel. 5. Longitudinal section showing the receptacle, with carpels attached. 2S lL Vou.L Paes 3 je ye Is MPANY, BOSTON CHEILANTHES VESTITA lath it CHEILANTHES VESTITA. HAIRY LIP-FERN. NATURAL ORDER, FILICES. CHEILANTHES VESTITA, Swartz.—Fronds broadly lanceolate, like the stalks hirsute with rusty hairs, bipinnate; pinnze triangular-ovate; pinnules oblong, obtuse, more or less incised; the ends of the lobes reflexed to form separate herbaceous involucres. Fronds four to eight inches long, becoming smooth above. (Chapman’s Flora of the Southern United States. See also Wood’s Class- Book of Botany, Gray’s Flora of the Northern United States, Eaton’s Ferns of North America, and Williamson’s ferns of Kentucky.) ;ERNS have no small part of the world allotted to them. i] Though but a fraction of the vegetable kingdom, they cna every portion of it with flowering plants. There is no spot, however rocky and dry, but some ferns may be found as well as where the soil is deep, and in damp or marshy places. In altitudes high up among the clouds ferns exist, as well as in low situations near the level of the sea. In the arctics and in the tropics—there is scarcely a spot on the habitable globe wherein the lover of plants may not expect to finda fern. The greater part of the Ferns of the Eastern United States love the shade of woods, or to be in rich or damp meadows; and those that live on rocks are usually found where there is shade above them, or cool moisture about the roots. But our present species, Cheilanthes vesttta—the Hairy Lip-Fern—is one which grows in the clefts of dry rocks, sometimes in exposed sunny places, where often in the summer season it dries and curls up, and ap- pears as if dead. In this condition it has been found by the writer on rocks along the Schuylkill river, and in Southern Illinois. Most species of fern are admired for their thin. filmy fronds ; 7 (97) 98 CHEILANTHES VESTITA.—HAIRY LIP-FERN. and delicate, graceful habit. This one has little of such charac- teristics to commend it. Though the fronds are cut and numer- ously divided, there is a stiffness and heaviness about the plant unusual in so many of its ferny neighbors, This is increased by the heavy, coarse hair covering the fronds, and from which its spe- cific name vest?ta has been derived. There is also an additional heaviness in the appearance from the great number of rather large spores, which often almost cover the back of the fertile frond. Again, the curving back of the margin of the lobes of the frond, from the manner of which the generic name is derived, makes the fronds look unusually thick for a graceful fern, Still it is a species which is very much admired by fern- lovers; and fern-culturists make very pretty specimens of it, when the best conditions for its growth are understood. This turning back of the edges of the leaves or fronds is one of the peculiarities of the genus. In the time of Linnzus it would have been regarded as a Pteris, which also has the edges of the fronds recurved; and indeed the genus founded by Swartz was established on a species from the Cape of Good Hope, pre- viously known as a f¥erts. The date of this establishment is fixed by the pteridologists as 1806; but the species here illus- trated had been discovered by Michaux three years before, and was referred by him to Wephrodium, a genus established by Richard, a French botanist, a few years before, and it is described in his works as Mephrodium fanosum. ‘When found to be more properly belonging to the new genus Cheilanthes, it was removed to that genus, and named Chedlanthes vestita, Some botanists have thought that as Michaux first described it, his specific name might at least have been preserved when it was taken to Cheilanthes, and they call it C davosa; but Professor Eaton, in his “Ferns of North America,” properly shows that though it is sometimes desirable to carry on these names where changes are made, it is not obligatory on the botanist to do so, and therefore we must abide by Swartz’s name, Cheidanthes vestila, though Michaux and not he was the original describer of the plant; and CHEILANTHES VESTITA.— HAIRY LIP-FERN. 99 we thus have an illustration of a rule in botanical nomenclature, that when a botanist discovers that a plant belongs to a different genus from the one in which it has been placed, and has the right to make a new name for it if it be a new genus, the adjective or specific name belongs of right to him also. Fora long time the Hairy Lip-fern was the only known species of our country, but of late years several others have been dis- covered, both in the eastern and western portions of the United States, This fern is very variable in its growth in different locations, and the collector may often be inclined to look on his collections as new species. In Mr. Williamson’s “Ferns of Kentucky” is a cut of the prevailing form in that State which shows a much more elongated and narrower frond than ours. On the Pacific coast some are found witha close relation to ours, but Professor Eaton decides these to be specifically distinct. In the sixth volume of the “Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club” he shows particu- larly how the C. Coofere of California differs from our present species in the hairs being tipped with a glandular enlargement. It would be well for those who may have the opportunity of noticing the species described here to observe whether among the variations to which it is known to be subjected there is in any localities a tendency towards this peculiarity. Mr. William- son in his “Ferns of Kentucky” notes that the hairs in our spe- cies are flattened as seen under a microscope, a form of hair not often found in plants. As already stated, Ferns have a wide geographical range, some extending to the extreme north, and others favoring the tropics; but distinct classes incline to have their own separate centres, and in this relation the species of the genus Chev/anthes seem to be departures from a southern rather than a northern home. The Hairy Lip-fern, now illustrated, is the most northern of all that grow along the Atlantic sea-board states. Professor Gray says in his “Manual,” that it is found in the clefts of rocks on New York island, where it was found by Mr. W. 100 CHEILANTHES VESTITA.— HAIRY LIP-FERN, Denslow, and from thence through New Jersey to Illinois and southwards; and Professor Eaton in his “Ferns of North Amer- ’ adds to this “Missouri and Kansas, and southward to Caro- lina and Georgia.” Of special locations Professor Eaton quotes Hackensack Swamp, New Jersey, discovered by Mr. F. J. Bum- stead, in 1865. Dr. Chapman, on the authority of Professor Kunze, of Leipsic, gives near Augusta, Georgia; and Dr. Kunze himself, as quoted in volume 6 of “Silliman’s Journal,’ new . * 1ca series, says, “it is evidently common in the southern states.” Dr. Engelmann, in the same volume, remarks that he “had col- lected it on the calcareous rocks about the Hot Springs of Ar- kansas ae and Dr. Darlington says in “Flora Cestrica,” that it is very common on rocks in Chester county, Pa. In Kentucky, Mr. Williamson says, it is rather rare, and gives Sweet Lick Knob, near Irvine, found by Dr. Crozier; and near the boundary between Edmonson and Barren counties, near the Diamond Cave, by Professor Hussey, as special locations. Professor Eaton furnishes several synonyms under which it has been known, but, except perhaps ddvantum vestitum of Sprengel, there are none beyond those already noted likely to be met with by our readers. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—1. A full-sized plant from a living specimen, furnished by Mr. Jackson Dawson. 2. Enlarged views of portions of. the frond, showing the recurved lip- like margin. a a rrare AURA IA Nc rantcatt on IRIS MISSOURIENSIS. ROCKY MOUNTAIN IRIS. NATURAL ORDER, IRIDACE. Iris MIssourIEnsIs, Nuttall.—Floweis beardless; stalk terete, taller than the leaves, sub three- flowered; leaves narrow, sword shaped; capsule oblong-linear; flowers two-colored. Stem twelve to sixteen inches high, erect, filled with pith, producing about three flowers, of which the large reflected petals are yellow, and the inner petals blue and narrow. Germ oblong-linear. (Nuttall in an account of the plants collected by Captain Wyeth. Fournal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, Vol. VIL, p. 38, 1841. See also Sereno Watson’s Botany of Clarence King’s Expedition as Lris Tolmieana, and Porter’s Hora of Colorado as Iris tenax ?) HOUGH we aim to make our work one for the whole people as well as for the botanist, and it might therefore seem that all that is known of a plant’s popular as well as of its scientific history should be included, it is not possible to do more than make selections, or give brief notes, except in cases where there may be many species of a genus, when from time to time we might hope to furnish enough to make every branch of a plant’s history tolerably complete. In regard to /77s we have already given short sketches of its popular history, and have related that the ancients gave its fabulous origin to Juno, in honor of Iris, one of her waiting-maids. We may here quote the account of this as set forth by a French writer of several hundred years ago, Louis L. D’Auxerre, and translated into English in 1706: “We are at a loss to know wineis /ris first had a being; some say at Florence; others in Greece; some in England; and others again fix her Nativity elsewhere; but it is known that she was the Daughter of 7haumantias and Llectra ; and, inasmuch as these Deities travell’d much, the Place of her Nativity was 102 IRIS MISSOURIENSIS. —ROCKY MOUNTAIN IRIS. not certainly known. J/77s was a true Copy of her Original; she was handsome, and had a noble Air; and somewhat else in her Carriage that spoke her Divine Original. “According to the good Custom of the Parents who seek noth- ing but the Advantage of their children, Thaumantias and Electra made it their whole care to advance their Daughter and procure her a Station worthy of her birth; and at last, managed the Matter so well, that Juno took her for her First Maid of Honour. “Ziis indeed had but odd Cards to play, having to live in the one House with Jupiter, who, as all the World knows, was a God of an Unholy Character. But after all 77s lived there, and remained a Model of every Virtue; for she being sprung of such Blood as hated every Species of Dishonor, carry'd herself so steadily, that even the Sovereign of the Gods respected her. “Juno, prepossess’d with an opinion of the Girl’s Discretion, bestowed upon her, besides the place she had, the Office of receiv- ing the Souls of dying Women, and conveying them to their appointed Stations ; but this was not the only Favour she showed to /ris,; for, after that /vzs had served her a little while, she resolved that she should not only appear in Heaven, but that a flower should grow upon the Earth that should bear her Name, _ and be deck’d in imitation of her, with divers Colours. “Tn pursuance of this Resolution, the Goddess took a certain Liquor, in which /rzs blowed three times; then shaking it again and again in a little Vessel, she gave it to her Waiting-Maid, who, after applying it fora Moment to her Mouth, pour’d it upon the Earth, where, as soon as it fell, up started a Flower, that has ever since gone by the Name of /77zs.” Most /rises of the United States are found at low elevations and in damp situations; some few at elevations of one or two thousand feet; but the present species, /rzs Alissouriensis, grows in places high above the level of the sea and in districts where rain seldom falls. The following, from Longfellow’s “Evangeline,” exactly describes the location wherein our plant is found— IRIS MISSOURIENSIS.— ROCKY MOUNTAIN IRIS. 103 “Far in the West there lies a desert land, where the mountains Lift, through perpetual snows, their lofty and luminous summits, Down from their jagged, deep ravines, where the gorge, like a gateway, Opens a passage rude to the wheels of the emigrant’s wagon, Westward the Oregon flows and the Walleway and Owyhee Eastward, with devious course, among the Wind-river Mountains, Through the Sweet-water Valley precipitate leaps the Nebraska; And to the South, from Fontaine-qui-bouille and the Spanish Sierras, Fretted with sands and rocks, and swept by the wind of the desert.” As it is the only species of /rzs found there, the common name of “Rocky Mountain Iris” has suggested itself to us. It was first discovered by Captain Wyeth on the return from his cele- brated expedition to the Pacific coast which left St. Louis in March, 1834. Mr. Nuttall says Captain Wyeth found it “near the sources of the Missouri on July gth,” and the specimen which he gathered, and from which Nuttall made his description, is preserved in the Herbarium of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. The plant, from which our drawing was made, was raised from seed gathered by the writer of this, in 1871, from nearly the same location on a level dry plain at an eleva- tion of about 8,000 feet above the level of the sea. Professor Porter notes that it has also been collected in Colorado by Dr. Smith, Brandegee, and Hall and Harbour, and again the writer col- lected it in the Veta Pass in Southern Colorado, in 1878, so that it may be looked for by those collecting in various parts of this interesting region. The knowledge of Nuttall’s plant was lim- ited, and hence the specimens, found by other collectors from this point west to Oregon, were not properly identified with it, and the species has been re-named by other authors. Herbert, in the “ Botany of Beechey’s Voyage,” describes it as /. Zolmze- ana, and as such it is referred to in Watson’s “ Botany of King’s Expedition.” Mr, Watson, after examining the specimens in the Philadelphia Academy, decides this to be the same as Nuttall’s original species. This discovery gives our Rocky Mountain plant a wider geographical range. As /. Tolmieana Mr. Watson records it “on the Willamette, Oregon; Northern California ; Ruby Valley, Nevada. Rather frequent on the. Pah-Ute to the East Humboldt Mountains, Nevada, 6,000 feet altitude.” 104 IRIS MISSOURIENSIS. —ROCKY MOUNTAIN IRIS, While sending our specimens to Mr. Watson, the drawing was also forwarded, of which he kindly says: “The leaves should be narrower (they are usually two to three lines broad—rarely more) and a paler glaucous green. It should show a pair of closely approximate bracts, acuminate, and differing from those of our other allied species in being thin, pale and scariously mar- gined, becoming wholly scarious. The petals (standards as Baker calls them) should be erect to the tips or nearly so. The flower of /ris is avery difficult thing to figure if you wish to give more than a general idea of it, and very few of them in the books are really satisfactory botanically. This of yours is on the whole as good as could be expected, with the one exception noted.” Our plant had but the one scape, and the endeavor to give the manner in which the second bud pushes from one side of the bracts prevented the showing of the double character. But to correct the deficiency noted by Mr. Watson, we have since added from a dried scape (Fig. 5), showing the two bracts referred to at B. In regard to the width of the leaves and tint, we may say that they are faithful representations of nature at the time the drawing was made; but the root-stock as seen in our picture is very strong and vigorous. No leaves are wider than those represented, most are longer and slenderer, as suggested by Mr. Watson. As seen in our plate, the flowers appear sessile; but as they mature, as the writer has seen them in their native places of growth, only one fruit seems to come to perfec- tion, and that one is on a pedicel of perhaps two inches long. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE.—1. Rootestock of last year. 2. Terminal growth of root-stock of preceding year. 3. Suab-terminal bud of last year, bearing the flower of the present sea- 8 son. 4. Scape, showing the bursting of the second flower from the bracts. 5. The scape at maturity not having perfected seed, but showing at B the two distinct bracts. SOLIDAGO ULMIFOLIA. ELM-LEAVED GOLDEN-ROD. NATURAL ORDER, COMPOSITE. SOLIDAGO ULMIFOLIA, Muhlenberg.—Stem srnooth, the branches hairy; leaves thin, elliptical- ovate or oblong-lanceolate, pointed, tapering to the base, loosely veined, beset with soft hairs beneath; racemes panicled, recurved-spreading ; scales of the involucre lanceolate- oblong ; rays about four. (Gray’s A/anzal of the Botany of the Northern United States. See also Chapman’s /lora of the Southern United States, and Wood’s Class- Book of Botany.) O work professing to give a general view of the native p g flowers of the United States would do justice to its srofessiaas unless it had something to say of the Golden-rods, for they are among the most distinguished of American flowers. Everybody who knows anything of our wild scenery knows the Golden-rod; and no picture or description of an American autumn landscape would be complete without the Golden-rod as an essential part thereof. Our polite literature is full of allusions to this flower: the best remembered being perhaps that by Bryant in his “ Death of the Flowers ”— “The Wind flower and the Violet, they perished long ago, And the Briar-rose and the Orchis died amid the summer glow; But on the hill the Golden-rod, and the Aster in the wood, And the yellow Sun-flower by the brook in autumn beauty stood, Till fell the frost from the clear cold heaven, as falls the plegue on men, And the brightness of their smile was gone, from upland, glade and glen.” Our country is famous for the fading tints of its autumn foli- age; but the rich yellow flowers of the Golden-rod mixing with the falling leaves do much towards the reputation for unsur- passed beauty which American autumn scenery enjoys. There are nearly fifty different species in the genus, and with one or 106 SOLIDAGO ULMIFOLIA.—ELM-LEAVED GOLDEN-ROD. two yellowish-white exceptions are all of them yellow; but they vary very much in habit and in the arrangement of the flowers, so that though the Golden-rods are everywhere in our autumn fields and forests, there seems to be an unending variation in the effect they produce; and the impression to the novice in their study is that there are even a greater number of species among them than is actually the case. Though so numerous in America, they are represented also in Europe, but only by a single species—the Solidago Virga-aurea —long known to the people of the Old World as the “ Golden- rod,’ a name which has come with the emigrant to the New World, and has thus been given to the whole family, though few of them have that virgate or rod-like character which suggested the name for the original species. An old herbalist tells us “it is called in Latin Virga aurea, because the Stalks, being reddish, make the bushy tips of the Flowers seem as if they were of a Gold-yellow, and in English it is called Golden-rod.” It is how- ever interesting to note that though there is only one species indigenous to Europe, that one species, Solidago Virga-aurea, is also a true native of the northern regions of our own continent. Another interesting fact in their geographical relationship is that notwithstanding their great number—nearly half a hundred spe- cies—in the Atlantic portion of the United States, they almost disappear as they approach the Pacific Ocean, only seven spe- cies being described in Brewer and Watson’s “ Botany of Cali- fornia.” To show how rapidly our knowledge of the Golden-rods pro- gressed, it may noted that in a copy of Gronovius’ “Flora Vir- ginica” before us, issued in 1762, there are but three species described. Muhlenberg in his catalogue (1813) enumerates forty-three, and for the whole of North America, Nuttall notes but forty-nine in 1818; while now before us is a copy of Wood’s « Class-Book,” in which are described forty-eight east of the Mississippi alone. Some of these indeed may be regarded in time as mere varieties of others, for in these days, as our know- SOLIDAGO ULMIFOLIA.—ELM-LEAVED GOLDEN-ROD. 107 Iedve of variation increases, the tendency of the best botanists is to unite forms rather than to name new species for every little shade of difference. The herbalist, to whom we have already referred, gives a figure of what he calls the “Golden-rod with dented leaves,’ and then refers to the “American Golden-rod,” of which he says: “This Plant is so like to the other, that the Fig- ure of that may very well serve for this without any considerable Error;”’ and though this expression may excite a smile from the accurate botanist of the present day, it must be confessed that the tendency in the past was too much in the way of making distinct species, or at least of giving distinct names to every slight deviation from an assumed typical form. Even of our present species, Solidago ulmifolia, Dr. Gray says in the “ Man- ual,” “too near Solidago altissima, distinguished only by its smooth stem and the larger leaves.” It may be here noted that the name a/z7/folia, meaning having leaves like an C7mus or Elm, is calculated to mislead, for the leaf has no great resemblance to that of an Elm. Willdenow, under botanical rules which call for a description and name, should properly be credited with this one, as he first published a description of it, though he gives credit to Muhlenberg as having sent him the name. It appears however that Muhlen- berg sent out to others a different species under this designation, and it is probable, from the unlikeness of this to an Elm, that it was not the one originally intended to bear the name; but as names are intended to be “only names,” this is now of little consequence, except as a matter of history. The name of the genus Solidago is usually referred to Lin- nzus, though he credits it to Vaillant, one of the great botanists of the generation which immediately preceded his. It is said to have been derived from sofdius, a Latin word meaning making whole or solid, and to be given to the “virga-aurea,” from its medical reputation. Salmon, the herbalist of the beginning of the seventeenth century, says: “It is one of the most noble Wound- Herbs; cures Wounds and Ulcers.” It also appears to have 108 SOLIDAGO ULMIFOLIA.—ELM-LEAVED GOLDEN-ROD. been quite famous as a dye. Another of the old herbalists, Culpeper, says: “ Venus rules this herb. It is a balsamic vulner- ary herb, long famous against inward hurts and bruises. No preparation is better than a tea of this herb for this service; and the young leaves, green or dry, have the most Virtue.” Lin- neus admits it into his “Materia Medica” as a vulnerary and diuretic. It is among the most remarkable of medical facts, that a plant, which was once so famous as to elicit such strong com- mendation, and to have a name given to it in connection with this reputation, should now be wholly discarded from medical practice. Our species, S. wdnzfora, has little to call especial attention to beyond what it might share with other species of the genus. It is one of the most common kinds in Eastern Pennsylvania where the plant illustrated grew. Its most striking character- istic is perhaps its large, open, branching stalks. Most of the familiar species of this region have their flowers in dense heads terminating the main flower stem; but this one begins to throw out slender branchlets, such as the one illustrated, low down on the stem; and there are many scores of these twiggy dividing branchlets in the make-up of the complete flower stalk. One of these main stems, often two feet high, covered with expanded flowers, is very showy indeed. It loves to grow in half-shaded woods, or in rather low, open places. In such situations it is often met with in most of the States from Alabama northwards. EXPLANATION OF THE PLATE.—1. Upper portion of a main flowering stem. 2. Lower portion of the same. 3. Enlarged disk floret. 4. A small branchlet. SICYOS ANGULATUS. 1 PRANG & COMPANY, Boson. PratEe 27 SICYOS ANGULATUS. STAR-CUCUMBER. NATURAL ORDER, CUCURBITACE.E, SICYOs ANGULATUS, Linnzeus.—Stem branching, hairy; leaves roundish, cordate, with an obtuse sinus, five-angled or five-lobed, lobes acuminate, denticulate, female flower much smaller than the male. A weak climbing vine, with long, spiral, branching tendrils. Leaves three to four inches broad, alternate, on long stalks. Flowers whitish, marked with green lines, the barren in long pedunculate racemes, Fruit six lines long, ovate, spinous, eight to ten together in a crowded cluster, each with one large seed. (Wood’s Class- Book of Botany. See also Gray’s Manual of the Botany of the Northern United States and Chapman’s Flora of the Southern United States.) (HE true artist has a great regard for nature when she 28 pays her respects to him attired in gayly colored rai- ment, and when we handed this plainly dressed individual to Mr. Lunzer, a shade of disappointment clouded his brow. It seemed as if he would like to say, “What can I make of a uniform tint of green?” But we shall be much mistaken if most of those who examine our plate do not pronounce it one of the most beautiful pictures any of our wild flowers have so far afforded us. It is, indeed, extremely rare that so many elements of beauty are combined in one subject, and especially when the great advantage of brilliant colors is wholly wanting. A considerable amount of strength is expressed in the leaves and in the stems, yet the stem is not so very strong but its gentle curve as it narrows towards the apex harmonizes with elegance. The lower portion of the stem is straight, and this is in excellent harmony with the straight peduncle, straight mid- veins and angles of the leaves; and yet these alone would have a very stiff appearance but for the timely relief afforded by the (109) IIo SICYOS ANGULATUS. — STAR-CUCUMBER. slight rounding of the base of the leaf-blade, and the general circular outline formed by the mass of little “pepos,’ as some authors call the fruits of some of these Cucurbitaceous plants. As the branch departs from its heaviness with its growth, and presents a pleasing curve, its elegance is increased by the slender tendrils gracefully twisting, and gently decreasing the diameter of their spiral coils till they terminate in a fine silk- like thread. Indeed, for a gradual blending of straight lines with curves, of heaviness with lightness, and of strength with elegance, this illustration of the “star-cucumber” can scarcely be surpassed, and will afford an interesting lesson to those to whom beauty is a science. Then there are a few points worth noting by those who are interested in the literary history of plants. Our subject seems to have been known to some of the earlier botanists, and Tourne- fort, the predecessor of Linnzeus in the work of botanical reform, placed it in the genus Szcoyordes—meaning, like the cucumber— sicyos (or sycios, according to Nuttall and others) being “cucumber” to the ancient Greeks. Linnzus established a rule that no adjective terminations should be allowed in generic names, and hence the last part was cut off, leaving Szcyos only. The explanation may be of service, as when the student is simply told that the name “is the ancient name of the cucumber,” he would be led to wonder what relation our plant bore to the cucumber of the olden time. Tournefort, in naming it S7coyordes, had doubtless nothing more in his mind than the great resem- blance which the leaves, stems, and tendrils bore to the common cucumber, a resemblance which is certainly very close. It is not quite clear what was the real cucumber of the ancients. The “lodge, in a garden of cucumbers,” of Isaiah and other scrip- tural references, are believed to relate rather to some kind of melon than to our modern cucumber. Passing from the foliage to the fruit we find very little here to remind us of its common family name. Instead of a large number of seeds in a succulent capsule, each little flower results in a single SICYOS ANGULATUS. —STAR-CUCUMBER. Ill seed, surrounded, finally, by a thin, dry covering. Each of the little “cucumbers” we see in our cluster is indeed nearly all seed. It is from the somewhat stellate appearance of this cluster of seed vessels that the common name of star-cucumber is derived. It is sometimes called “single-seeded cucumber,” for reasons already made obvious. Aiton says it is commonly called “Cho-cho vine;’ ’ but this is probably an error, the name belonging to the Sechium edule, a plant of the same natural order growing in the West Indies. One of the most remarkable incidents in the life of the star- cucumber is its amazing growth under favorable circumstances. Dr. John M. Coulter, at page 72 of first volume of the “ Botanical Gazette,” speaking of the Lower Wabash, in Indiana, says: “These low rich bottoms have yielded such monsters in growth, especially among the climbers, that one is reminded of a South American jungle,” and among these climbers refers especially to the “ single-seeded cucumber, Szevos angulatus, matting all bushes and vegetation within ten feet of its root into a thicket, or climbing up a neighboring tree to the distance of sixty-three feet” Dr. Darlington, in his “Flora Cestrica,” notes that “this cucumber-like vine has found its way into some gardens, where it is something of a nuisance, and rather difficult to be got rid of,” though the amiable old botanist did not seem to have a heart to include it among the farm evils in his “Agricultural Botany.” But Dr. Michener, in his “ Manual of Weeds,” has less tenderness for the beautiful vine. He says it is “an unwelcome vagrant from the gardens, which requires to be closely watched, wherever it may occur.” The writer of this has often watched ‘it, but not as an “unwelcome vagrant,” or as a vagrant in any case. It loves to grow about old wood-piles, or in any place where there is an abundance of decaying vegetable matter; and it often does loving service in covering up the remains of old carts or farm implements that are too often left in most unsightly conditions about farm buildings. It is indeed pleasant to watch T12 SICYOS ANGULATUS, —-STAR-CUCUMBER. it under these circumstances and note how rapidly it grows, and transforms what was unpleasant into a picturesque and often beautiful scene. The rapidity of its growth already referred to will always make it a subject of interesting study. The plant from which our illustration was taken sprouted from a seed in May, and before frost had rambled over bushes some thirty feet away. It had many hundreds of branches. An estimate was formed of their number, and it was found that if these branches were placed end to end they would make a line of two thousand feet! Many of the lower leaves die as the growth progresses, but the calculation gave about one hundred square feet of leaf- surface on the vine at one time, from which an immense amount of moisture must be exhaled during the twenty-four hours. The stem at the ground is no thicker than a lead-pencil, and the reader can imagine how rapid must be the flow of water through this narrow stem in order to supply the enormous exhalation. We look with wonder on the mammoth tree of California and similar vegetable productions,—but not less wonderful are the facts of plant-growth everywhere about us, and in few things are they more strikingly illustrated than in the growth of the star- cucumber. It grows in most of the states east of the Rocky Mountains, except the extreme northeast and northwest portions. ASPLENIUM EBENOIDES L, PRANG & COMPANY, 30ST = 1 & COMBAN ASPLENIUM EBENOIDES. SCOTT’S SPLEENWORT. NATURAL ORDER, FILICES, ASPLENIUM EBENOIDES, R. R. Scott.—Fronds evergreen. Barren fronds spreading, four to six inches long, lanceolate, pinnate at the base, pinnatifid towards the apex, tapering into a slender prolongation ; apex rooting; rachis black. Fertile fronds eight to ten inches long, nearly upright, pinnate at the base; pinnules of unequal Jength, an inch or more long, linear lanceolate; frond tapering into a slender prolongation which is sinuous and prolif- erous, mid-rib permanent to the apex; fronds more membranaceous than Asplenium pin- natifidum, which, with the black rachis, distinguishes it from that species. (R. Robinson Scott, in Gardener’s Monthly for September, 1865. See also Gray’s Manual of the Botany of the Northern United States, Chapman’s £lora of the Southern United States, and Eatou’s Ferzs of North America.) HHS interesting fern has a remarkable history. A single fyi] plant was discovered in 1862, eight miles from Phila- delphia, on the west bank of the Schuylkill, by Robert Robinson Scott, then gardener to Mr. Kennedy, of Port Kennedy. Mr. Scott was no ordinary man. He was related to some of the wealthiest families of Belfast, in Ireland, where he was born and received an excellent education. He was a proficient in most of the ancient and many of the modern languages, and. early developed a taste for natural history, and especially for Botany. He went through a course of study in the Botanic Garden of Glasnevin, and subsequently in the Royal Gardens at Kew. His father had a passionate love for his native land which the son inherited, and their course in this respect estranged them from their relations, and finally reduced them to absolute poverty. It was particularly a trait in the young botanist’s character that he would sacrifice on the instant every prospect of usefulness in his chosen scientific career, for his ideal of liberty and freedom, (113) Ti4 ASPLENIUM EBENOIDES.— SCOT1’S SPLEENWOKT. Thus it became impossible for his scientific friends to aid him to any great extent, though conscious of his eminent talents. His botanical acuteness enabled him easily to place any unknown plant from any part of the world in its systematic relationships, and in a remarkabuy snort time to discover its proper name and history. Had he retained his proper faculties he might have become a prince in Botany. He came to America in 1848, taking up with the horticultural profession for a living. In 1867-8, his mind gave way, and he died a few years ago in the State lunatic asylum at Harrisburg. It is no wonder that so acute an observer should have detected a new species in this solitary plant. But it was strange that he could find no leading botanist in America, to whom he sub- niutted specimens, to agree with him, or give him the slightest encouragement in his researches—as he thought, because he was but “a poor gardener.” Satisfied, however, that it was new, he described it himself with an illustration in the magazine above cited, but still no notice was taken of it in our own land. He then thought he would try the European botanists, and in 1866, one year after his own description, the Rev. M. G. Berkeley noticed it in “the Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society of London” in July of that year as “probably a hybrid,” but retaining Mr. Scott’s name. This little piece of history has its valuable lesson. It teaches the student to search carefully for facts; and when he, himself, is sure of the facts, not to be too easily disheartened because others do not at once see things as he does. Since Mr. Scott found his single plant, several others have been found in the same vicinity by Mr. Bourquin, a botanist of Camden, New Jersey; by Miss Julia S. Tutwiler, of Greene Springs, near the Black Warrior river; and by W. H. Leggett, at Canaan in Connecticut. Mr. John Williamson, in his “ Ferns of Kentucky,” published in 1878, remarks: “We have in Kentucky all the Aspleniums found in the Northern United States, except the somewhat doubtful +1. cbenordes,’—but before the sheets of ASPLENIUM EBENOIDES.—SCOTT’S SPLEENWORT. 115 his little work were scarcely from the press it was found, in July of that year, in Franklin county, in that State, by Professor R. W. Wildberger. It is, therefore, probable from these several recent discoveries in widely separated localities that it will yet be found in many other places, and the probability will give increased interest to fern explorations. Miss Julia Tutwiler finds the plant in considerable quantity in her location, and, in a letter dated April 15th, 1879, to the writer of this, she thus describes her experience with it: “Our resi- dence in Alabama is in latitude 32° 47’ north, longitude 87° 45’ west, eight miles from the Black Warrior river. The black- lands, or cotton-lands, formerly prairies, covered with cane and with cedar-hummocks near there, lie about fifteen miles south of us. Where we reside the soil is either red clay, or a mixture of sand and gravel, except in the creek and river bottoms. The face of the country is rolling, covered with hills from one hun- dred to two hundred feet above the level of the sea. We find no stones here except conglomerate, or ‘pudding-stone,’ as it is familiarly called. The geologists say the whole formation here belongs to the tertiary. I was agreeably surprised some years ago to find some miles away from our home, in a deep glade formed by the gradual work of a little brook which now runs through it, several plants which I have never found around our home, though I know these woods quite well. One of these was the FLALE 4p Fx at RIP ARS Vis TYMNOGE \ GYMNOGRAMMA TRIANGULARIS. CALIFORNIA GOLD FERN. NATURAL ORDER, FILICES. GYMNOGRAMMA TRIANGULARIS, Kaulfuss.—Fronds densely tufted, six to twelve inches long, dark chestnut-brown, glossy, nearly naked; fronds from three to four inches each way, deltoid; lower pinnze very much the largest, deltoid, unequal-sided, the others lanceo- late, deeply pinnatifid, with oblong obtuse lobes; texture sub-coriaceous, powdery varying from deep orange to white. (Eaton’s Ferns of North America; and Botany of Wheeler's Expedition.) I the end of the last century there were few large genera AY: of ferns but Acrostichum, Polypodium, Asplenium, Pierts and Adiantum. But the number of species increased to such an extent that it became a matter of convenience as well as of a more perfect study to look for systems of classification which should unite only those forms that were structurally allied, and yet break up the overloaded genera as they were constructed at that time. The introduction of the natural system of Botany helped the study of classification, though indeed the ferns as they stood in the artificial system of Linnaeus composed one of his most natural classes. Still with the introduction of the natural method, chiefly through Jussieu, the classification of ferns into genera was made dependent on little more than the form or position of the sori or fruit dots on the frond. Thus to have round sori made a PolyPodium, in right lines an Aspleniun, in marginal lines a Pleris, and jn terminal sub-circles an Adiantum. It was at length found that the manner in which the fruit dots opened was uniform in evidently allied forms, and further that the manner in which the veins forked or were developed also had great similarity in groups that might be divided ee 178 GYMNCGRAMMA TRIANGULARIS. —CALIFCRNIA GCLD FERN, genera, and with some other characters of more or less impor- tance the great family of ferns was divided into numerous genera, and their study much simplified in consequence. Still division has been carried further than sound dividing characters perhaps warrant,—certainly beyond the point that natural appear- ances in the species grouped into genera seem to demand; and while there have been over five hundred genera described by various modern authors, it is probable there are really but one- third of that number which would stand criticism from a truly natural point of view. Our genus Gymnogramma was taken from Acrostichum in 1811, by Desveaux, a celebrated French botanist of the early part of the century, and chiefly because the fruit was not only in right lines, but was characterized by the absence of an indusium or membrane, which usually seems to cover in part the sporangia. It was from this peculiarity that the name Gymnogramma was formed; gymnos being a Greek word for naked, and ¢7vamma, writing or lines; that is, the lines of fruit being naked. The species are somewhat numerous, but chiefly inhabit tropical regions. Only two enter the limits of the United States. Of these only our present subject has ven- tured far within its borders, and this is found from along the Pacific coast from Central America north to Vancouver’s Island. It was first discovered, like so many other of our western species, by the Vancouver expedition, and named Gymnogramma tri- angularis by Kaulfuss, who described the ferns collected on this voyage ia his “Enumeration Filicum,” published in Leipsic in 1824. Our knowledge of it is therefore comparatively recent, and we are only now beginning to find that several supposed distinct species of various authors belong to it. Sir W. J. Hooker, in his “Species Filicum,” says, “it is remarkably uniform in its form and ramifications,” but specimens from different col- lectors in the herbarium of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, show the variations usual in well-known ferns. Mr. Nuttall has specimens from San Diego, California, which he thought deserving of a distinct specific name. He labels it G. GYMNOGRAMMA TRIANGULARIS.—CALIFORNTIA GOLD FERN. -179 vescosa, and this Mr, Eaton, in a note attached to the specimen, proposes to retain asa varietal name. Specimens from the woods of the Columbia of what Mr. Nuttall seems to have regarded as the normal form have small and rather narrow fronds in pro- portion to the length of the stipe. Some specimens from Mrs, Elwood Cooper, of Santa Barbara, have fronds with stipes near a foot in length, and very broadly triangular outline, this some- what triangular form suggesting its specific name. In speci- mens collected by Dr. Edward Palmer from Guadalupe Island, off the coast of California, the stipes are not more than two inches long, with the frondose portion of about the same length. In this, as in many other species of Gymnogramma, the under surface is covered by a powdery exudation, and this varies in the specimens in the herbarium cited from deep golden yellow in Mrs. Cooper’s specimen to silvery in those from much farther north. Many ferns prefer wet places, while others seem as well fitted especially for dry situations. Though this species would be included in the latter class, it is not insensible to the advantages of moisture. Dr. C. C. Parry, who collected it in California, once told the writer of this chapter that it grew in great abundance in the shelter of rocks and edges of ravines, where it could be well moistened by the early winter rains. In southern Cali- fornia he usually found it growing in matted clumps, with fronds of various sizes and degrees of development according to the season or location, all coming up among the remains of stalks of previous seasons. In dry weather they all curled up and exhibited little but the yellow powdery under surfaces, and from these it takes its common name of ‘Gold fern” in California. Another friend, Dr. C. L. Andrews, of Santa Cruz, writing of the ferns of that part of California, also refers to its moisture-loving pro- pensities as a condition of growth. He says, “Gymnogramma triangularis is found in all shady places where there are cliffs, some moisture, and a rocky debris with vegetable mold. It clings loosely to the soil, and grows where mosses and liver- 180 GYMNOGRAMMA TRIANGULARIS.—CALIFORNIA GOLD FERN. wort abound, It seems to grow largest in sandy earth among decaying leaves. In summer and fall (our dry season) the leaves curl up into little balls. But with the first rain they seem as fresh as ever, probably from a new growth.” These facts will very much assist those who may endeavor to cultivate it. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE. 1. A full-sized plant. 2. Under surface of mature frond. 3. Enlarged pinnule, showing arrangement of the sporangia. 4. Pinnule, showing the upper surface. LONICERA SEMPERVIRENS. SCARLET TRUMPET HONEYSUCKLE. NATURAL ORDER, CAPRIFOLIACEE. LONICERA SEMPERVIRENS, Aiton.—Leaves oblong, evergreen, the upper ones connate-perfoliate ; flowers in nearly naked apikes of rather distant whorls; corolla trumpet-shaped, nearly regular, ventricose above. Stem woody, twining in the same direction with the sun. The distinct leaves in the wild plant are elliptical or almost linear; the connate ones but one or two pairs. Corolla of a live scarlet without, and yellow within. (Wood’s Class-Book of Botany. See also Gray’s Manual of the Botany of the Northern United States, and Chapman’s Flora of the Southern United States.) ‘ ue NDER the names of Honeysuckle and Woodbine there ANZ are perhaps few families of plants better known through the works of the poets and other polite writers. All who refer to them have generally united in regarding them as emblems of affection, and any allusion to them in poetry is usually in con- nection with this sentiment. Joaquin Miller, in “First Love,” describing the memory of an early passion, says: ‘She stands as she stood in the glorious Olden, Swinging her hat in her right hand dimpled; The other hand toys with a honeysuckle That has tip-toed up and is trying to kiss her.” But much of the poetry of the Honeysuckle refers to its aid in giving the cosy character to an English cottage, and to the adornment of arbors and bowers. In his advice to young damsels, not to believe too easily what every wooer tells them, Thomson, in his “Seasons,” says: “Nor in the bower, Where woodbines flaunt, and roses shed a couch, While evening draws her crimson curtains round tg a Trust your soft minutes with betraying man.” (181) 182 LONICERA SEMPERVIRENS.—SCARLET HONEYSUCKLE. Nearly all our own poets, when they refer at all to the Wood- bine or Honeysuckle, keep this embowering character especially in view. Bryant, in the “Unknown Way,” asks of the strange path— Guest thou by nestling cottage ? Goest thou by stately hall, 2 Where the broad elm drvops, a leafy dome, And woodbines flaunt on the wall?” and, in the “Evangeline” of Longfellow, we are told that— “ Firmly builded with rafters of oak, the house of the farmer Stood on.the side of a hill commanding the sea; and a shady Sycamore grew by the door, with a woodbine wreathing around it.” It must be confessed, however, that our poets have either had their imaginations influenced by European literature or by Euro- pean experiences, for our native species have not the rampant habit of the European, and most of the honeysuckles and wood- bines of American horticulture, which help us to make umbrageous bowers, come to us from China or Japan; and when we see the we have little but the name to connect them with the plants of which the poets ’ woodbine on the American “nestling cottage, sing. But the names carry us back a long way into history. By the ancient Greeks and Romans, as we learn from Pliny, the Honeysuckie was known as the Ferzclymenon. Literally, this is “rolling or twining around,” and is equivalent to the modern Woodbine. Honeysuckle seems a puzzling word to modern in- vestigators. Dr. Prior says, in his “Popular Names of British Plants,” that the name probably belonged to some other plant, and was “transferred to the woodbine on account of the honey- dew so plentifully deposited on its leaves.” But the account given by Green, the old English herbalist, seems to offer a better reason, He says: “In the evenings some species of sphinges, or hawk-moths, are frequently observed to hover over the blossoms, and with their long tongues to extract the honey from the very bottom of the flowers, A considerable quantity of the nectareous juice may sometimes be discerned in the tube. Insects that are LONICERA SEMPERVIRENS. —-SCARLET HONEYSUCKLE, 183 too large to penetrate into the narrow part of the tube, and have not a long tongue like the sphinges, to reach the juice, make a puncture towards the bottom and so fairly tap the juice.” It may be remarked here that the word “ Honeysuckle,’ by all the earlier writers, seems to have been confined to the flowers of the Woodbine plant. “A honeysuckle, The amorous woodbine’s offspring,” as Ben Jonson expresses it, and this would leave Dr. Prior’s ex- planation quite out of the question. It is worthy of remark, by the way, that Green notes the habit of the larger insects of boring into the corolla from the outside, an insect-practice supposed to be among the discoveries of these modern days. Another name of somewhat ancient times was Capr7folium, and this has been taken as a name for the whole order—Caprifoliacce. In like manner this name puzzles the commentators, and is thought to be derived from Latin words signifying a goat and a leaf, “because goats are fond of the leaves.” ‘This is an unlikely reason. A popular name for the Woodbine among some of the English peasantry who know nothing of Latin is “Caprifoly;” and itis probably, therefore, a corruption from some forgotten source. The botanical name, Lovzcera, credited to Linnzus in our text- books, seems to have been first applied by Ray, a noted English botanist who flourished towards the end of the seventeenth cen- tury; and it commemorates Adam Lonitzer, who wrote several large folio volumes on the medical properties of plants which were published in Frankfort between 1551 and 1564. He was born at Marbourg in 1528 and died in Frankfort in 1586. The name appears in Plumier’s works in 1703, and he is often credited with the authorship of the name. Independently of its family history and generical associations, our Trumpet Honeysuckle has abundant points of its own to interest the student and the mere lover of wild American floral scenery. There is scarcely anything more lovely than this species when it gets a chance to clamber over low bushes on the outskirts of Q To4 LONICERA SEMPERVIRENS,—SCARLET HONEYSUCKLE, woods. It is very often found, however, in the deeper shade, and then its flowers are few. In these cases, even in Pennsyl- vania where it is occasionally found, its trailing stems retain the leaves green all the winter, though Dr. Gray says “leaves de- ciduous in the North,” referring probably to cultivation. The plant is not found wild beyond Southern New York, whence it extends down to Louisiana and Florida, and Mr. Butler, in the first volume of the “ Botanical Gazette,’ notes that it is found across the Mississippi in Arkansas. Usually it favors low, moist places, but Mr. Howard Shriver, in the same magazine, states that it is found on cliffs of the New river in Virginia. Most of the species of Honeysuckle have the mouth of the corolla divided into two distinct portions or “lips;” our species is peculiar in having the mouth but slightly notched, and the divisions mostly regular. It is from this that it derives its name of “Trumpet Honeysuckle.” From its bright color it is also called quite fre- quently the “Scarlet Coral Honeysuckle.” It will be interesting to compare the manner of flowering with that of many other species of Honeysuckle. In some the leaves as well as the flowers are perfectly formed at eachnode. The flowering is then said to be axillary. In our species the leaves are nearly or en- tirely suppressed, and this makes the flowering appear in terminal racemes. It is further remarkable that in the case of those species which have this terminal character the upper leaves generally unite, and often increase in size. We may also note that when this union occurs there is much difference in the veining of the leaves, and this gives color to the view of some German mor- phologists that it is the growth of the leaf-blade that decides the number and position of the veins, and not that the veins are first formed as if they were the skeleton, the lcaf-blade in form and character being then made to suit the veins. CHEI 91 VE Glas Me PLATE 46. CHELONE GLABRA. TURTLE-HEAD. NATURAL ORDER, SCROPHULARIACE-E, CHELONE GLABRA, Linnzeus.—A foot or two feet (or in Illinois six to seven fect) high; leaves from narrowly to rather broadly lanceolate (‘uur to five inches long, four to twelve lines wide), gradually acuminate, serrate with sharp appressed teeth, narrowed at the base into a very short petiole: bracts not ciliate: corolla white, or barely tinged with rose, an inch long. (Gray’s Syxoptical Flora of North America. See also Gray’s Manual of the Botany of the Northern United States, Chapman’s flora of the Southern United States, and Wood’s Class-Book of Botany.) HIS very pretty wild flower will interest the collector, not Lees only because it is pretty, but also because it will furnish ratedal for good botanical lessons, especially in that part of botany which deals with the evolution of form and the relation which plants bear to one another in systems of classification. Taking this latter topic first, it may be well to assume that a large number of our readers know what is a Feztstemon, for they form not only a very extensive genus, but some one or more of them are found in most parts of the territory covered by our work— the United States. Besides this, the /ezéstemon has been improved by skilful florists, and thus has become a very popular garden plant, and afforded many besides those who go out to gather wild flowers, the opportunity of being acquainted with them. The natural order to which the Prréstemon, Chelone, and many other American plants belong, Scrophulariacee, has usually two pairs of didynamous or twin stamens, one pair generally above the other ; but occasionally some of the number are abortive and only two stamens appear. On the other hand, there is at times a tendency to add to the normal number four, by the introduction of a fifth stamen. In /2zéstemon this fifth (185) 186 CHELONE GLABRA,—TURTLE-HEAD, stamen is produced to the length and of the strength of the four perfect stamens, though we can see it has still imperfect anthers ; but the fifth in this family being so conspicuously prominent, even to this extent, earned for the genus its botanical name Pent- (or fifth) stemon. Now, our present subject, Chelone (pro- nounced in three syllables), is much like Peméstemon in this respect, though, while the fifth or imperfect stamen is developed to the full length in Fzés¢emon, it is much shorter than the other four in our present subject, and botanists dwell much on this in noting the differences between the two. There are also some little differences in the peculiar compression of the corolla in Chelone, and in the general appearance; and, after all, it is a question whether it is not rather because of the general appear- ance of the plant and flower that it is kept separate from Pemt- stemon, for very few persons, unacquainted with the niceties of botanical classification, would at first take it for a Pemdstenzon. There is, however, one little point which seems characteristic and sufficient to decide them, and that is in the seed, which has always around it a broad membraneous wing, never to be found in Pezd- stemon, so that this, with the general distinct appearance, might be relied on to distinguish. But even the general appearance is not always to be relied on, for the “Botany of the Californian Geological Survey” tells us that there is a plant in Oregon so exactly like a Fenéstenon, that one has to note the membraneous border to the seeds before knowing that it is a Chelone. On the other hand, there are some /ezéstemons that have been thought to be Chelones, and the whole teaches us on how slender founda- tions often stand what we think are very distinct genera. As to how one form may grow out of another, a hint may be gathered from a communication by Mr. Henry F. Young to the Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club for 1872. As already noted in Che/one, the fifth or false stamen is much shorter than the others, but Mr. Young found a flower in which were five per- fect stamens, This isa very important fact as showing the line of descent. In this genus and most of its allies the calyx is five- CHELONE GLABRA,—~-TURTLE- HEAD. I 87 parted ; and the corol'a, though of but one petal, is also usually five-lobed. This shows that the normal structure of the flower is pentamerous, or formed on a plan of five, and that it is only by a union or suppression of parts that we have the forms we see. Even when we come to study the species as well as the genus, the relation of one form to the other is found so close as to make the line of distinction very uncertain. In the earlier times Linnzeus described two species. One, our present Chelone glabra, is thus described by Willdenow, “leaves lanceolate, ser- rate, petiolate ; the upper ones opposite.” The other C od/igua is said to have “leaves lanceolate, serrate, petiolate opposite.” It is not surprising, therefore, that succeeding botanists were in doubt about them. Professor Wood does not refer to C. cdligua even as a synonym, as Dr. Chapman in his Southern Flora, and Dr. Gray in his Manual of 1867, do,—but the latter in his “Synopsis” of 1878, again carries it back to its Linnzan position as a distinct species, giving a character not mentioned by Will- denow, that in C odd7gua the bracts are “ciliolate,” while in our species he says they are “not ciliate,” meaning perhaps “cilio- late,” or having a few short or scattered bristles along the mar- gins of the bracts, which are probably variable after all. Lindley and Mooré’s Treasury of Botany says, “The so-called C. e/abra is now regarded as but one of the forms of C. od/igua,” but if one name has to be dropped, it should be the latter in accord- ance with the practice of American botanists. A. L. de Jussieu, a distinguished French author of the end of the last century, and one of the fathers of modern Botany, tells us C. e/adra was the earliest name, and that the character of the whole genus was drawn from this species. That the species has “many forms” American botanists know. Mr. Coleman finds one in the South- ern Peninsula of Michigan with leaves only between a quarter to half an inch wide, which he calls variety “linifolia.”. The flowers are also variable in color. It is often pure white, and again it is frequently found of the rosy tint we have given in our plate, which is from a Pennsylvania specimen. 188 CHELONE GLABRA,—TURTLE-HEAD, Linnaeus is usually credited with the name, but he tells us he adopted it from Dillenius, an author who flourished just before his own time. Tournefort, however, seems to be the original author, who wrote about 1700, and who, according to Milne, named it Chelone, “from the Greek, meaning a tortoise, from the figure of its seeds, which are round, compressed, and begirt with a membraneous rim or border.” Clayton, and others of his time, regarded it as one of the Digztahs or Fox-gloves ; though Gronovius, the editor of Clayton’s work, refers it cor- rectly to Tournefort’s Chelone. Lindley and Moore, already quoted, say, comparing it with Pentstemon, “the form of the corolla in this genus is very dis- tinct, the broad-keeled upper lip and scarcely open mouth giving it some resemblance to the head of a tortoise or turtle, to which feature are due both the scientific appellation and the popular American name of ‘Turtle-head.’”” Our American botanists do not seem quite sure about this. Professor Wood, after giving the Greek name, simply says, “from the appearance of the flower,” and Dr. Gray, though he translates the Greek to “tor- toise,” adds, “the corolla resembling in shape the head of a rep- tile,’ which may include many things besides a tortoise. The peculiar-looking seed, as already noted, is the chief distinctive mark between Fentsfemon and Chelone,and as this must have been in mind by the botanist describing it, gives some reason for concluding Milne to be right as to the original intention of the name. The “American common name” probably came from the botanists, for we have rarely heard those who live among the flower give it any name. Dr. Gray says it grows “from Newfoundland to the Saskatch- ewan and south to Florida.” It is across the Mississippi, how- ever, in Arkansas, though it has not been found in Kansas or Nebraska, It bears garden culture well. Among the common names given in books are “Snake-head,” “Shell-flower,” and « Balmony.” 188 CHELONE GILABRA. —TURTLE-HEAD. Linnaeus is usually credited with the name, but he tells us he adopted it from Dillenius, an author who flourished just before his own time. Tournefort, however, seems to be the original author, who wrote about 1700, and who, according to Milne, named it Che/one, “from the Greek, meaning a tortoise, from the figure of its seeds, which are round, compressed, and begirt with a membraneous rim or border.” Clayton, and others of his time, regarded it as one of the Digztals or Fox-gloves; though Gronovius, the editor of Clayton’s work, refers it cor- rectly to Tournefort’s Chelone. Lindley and Moore, already quoted, say, comparing it with Pentstemon, “the form of the corolla in this genus is very dis- tinct, the broad-keeled upper lip and scarcely open mouth giving it some resemblance to the head of a tortoise or turtle, to which feature are due both the scientific appellation and the popular American name of ‘Turtle-head.’” Our American botanists do not seem quite sure about this. Professor Wood, after giving the Greek name, simply says, “from the appearance of the flower,” and Dr. Gray, though he translates the Greek to “tor- toise,” adds, “the corolla resembling in shape the head of a rep- tile,’ which may include many things besides a tortoise. The peculiar-looking seed, as already noted, is the chief distinctive mark between Pentstemon and Chelone,and as this must have been in mind by the botanist describing it, gives some reason for concluding Milne to be right as to the original intention of the name. The “American common name” probably came from the botanists, for we have rarely heard those who live among the flower give it any name. Dr. Gray says it grows “from Newfoundland to the Saskatch- ewan and south to Florida.” It is across the Mississippi, how- ever, in Arkansas, though it has not been found in Kansas or Nebraska, It bears garden culture well. Among the common names given in books are “Snake-head,” “Shell-flower,” and “ Balmony.” PLATE 47 BA. ~\ J) NDIA SERIC SE WN 10 als L TOWNSENDIA. SERICEA, SILKY TOWNSEND FLOWER. NATURAL ORDER, COMPOSITA, TOWNSENDIA SERICEA, Hooker.—Stemless, from a simple or much branched caudex, one to two inches high; leaves spatulate-linear, silky canescent, acute, one-nerved, twelve to fifteen lines long, erect, surrounding and partly concealing the heads (eight lines long), which are sessile or on very short peduncles; scales of the involucre subulate-lanceolate, pubescent, green in the centre, purplish towards the tip; margins scarious, lacerate-ciliate; rays long; narrow, not spreading; pappus of the disk white, about as long as the corolla, pappus of the ray of several unequal subulate bristles, much shorter than the achenium and one or two long ones (sometimes nine or ten) similar to those of the disk flowers; achenium hairy, hairs minutely capitate. (Porter’s Synopsis of the Flora of Colorado, See also Torrey and Gray’s Flora of North America.) ( SSHIINCE the railroad progress of the few years past has brought the Rocky Mountain country so near to us, and many of the most intelligent class of tourists make Colorado their summer home, the desire to become acquainted with its natural history and especially its botany is very great. Its flora is indeed interesting, not merely for its own sake, but also because its Alpine vegetation affords us in some degree a knowledge of a more northern flora) The present species for instance, an inhabitant of the Rocky Mountains, is also an Arctic plant, and was indeed first made known to us by the naturalists connected with the first voyage to the Arctic seas, of the subsequently unfortunate Sir John Franklin; and it is described in Dr. John Richardson's account of the plants collected on that expedition, published in 1823. Dr. Richardson thought it might be a species of Aster, to which it is somewhat related, occupying a position between Asterand Zrigeron. Its true distinction from Aster was perceived by Sir William J. Hooker, who, in 1829, published the : (189) Igo TOWNSENDIA SERICEA.—SILKY TOWNSEND FLOWER. “Flora Boreali-Americana,” wherein he described and named it as Towrsendia, Its general appearance leads one to suspect some difference from Aster; and the globular involucre (Fig. 2) strikes us at once when we go into details, as in Aster it is ovoid or oblong. Scme authors note a difference in the relative length of the pappus in the ray and disk florets, it being shorter in the latter. Dr. Masters, in the “Treasury of Botany,” says of Zowyz- sendia, “the fruits are hairy, and the pappus is in one row, scaly in the outer, hairy in the inner fruits.” The difference in the pappus seems to be the great point of comparison. Sir W. J. Hooker says, in the work referred to: “This highly interesting plant, no less on account of its habit than its pappus, deserves to be separated from As¢er, of which it was by Richardson con- sidered a doubtful species.” When speaking of the pappus par- ticularly he says: “ Pappus of the ray composed of several unequal subulate bristles much shorter than the achenium, and one or two long ones nearly resembling those of the disk flowers.” In regard to this matter of the pappus Nuttall says, in the “Ameri- can Philosophical Society’s Transactions” for 1834-35, “Achenium obovate, margined, and flatly depressed, sericeous (silky) with a numerous connate series of white silky pappus almost plumose, barbellate, and remarkably attenuated above. We have thought it important to call the collector's attention to what these different authors say of the pappus (the silky hair coming up from the tip of the seed at # in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4), because it will be seen that though there is something evidently distinct in its characters from Aséer, no two of the writers exactly agree, and our Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 would scarcely be recognized as coming under the description of any one. The bristles “much do not show at all; rather, instead ” ’ shorter than the achenium’ of “one or two” being long in the ray flower (Fig. 3), they are all “resembling those of the disk” (Fig. 4); being but little shorter. Our drawing was made from a Colorado specimen, kindly furnished by Prof. Sargent, of the Cambridge Botanical Garden, but the same character as figured in our plate exists in TOWNSENDIA SERICEA.—SILKY TOWNSEND FLOWER. Igl dried natural specimens. We were at first disposed to regard this development of the pappus in the ray flowers abnormal in this respect,—but it may be noted that in Mr. Watson’s Botany of King’s Expedition, a species 7. scapfigera is figured, in which also there seems nothing but a little difference in length to dis- tinguish the pappus of the disk from that of the ray. Our plant would probably be regarded as the same with that described in the “ Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club,” vol. 6, p.163,as 7. Wilcoxtana, by Prof. Wood, who says of it, “ pappus alike in the ray and the disc florets, consisting of about thirty white bristles,’ and he remarks that it is confounded in Herba- riums with 7. sericea. Since the discovery of the species we now describe by the Franklin expedition, so many new forms have been found from the Arctics to New Mexico, and so nearly like each other, that botanists are almost afraid to name and describe them as new species, and, therefore, we have thought it might help the student, by dwelling on this point relative to the pappus, to prepare him to look for probable variations. Among the interesting points connected with our plant is one quoted by Hooker in regard to the time when the buds are formed. In most composite plants these are developed after the growth of the leaves in the spring; Sir W. J. Hooker says “the bud is formed in the autumn,” and what Dr. Richardson further observed in the living plant I find to be characteristic of all the specimens in this collection, that “ the florets of the ray are mostly involute, rarely expanded, and always narrow, nearly of the same color with the pappus and inconspicuous; the flowers indeed never fully expanding,” in which again the student will see some differences in our plate. Though with apparently so wide a distribution through the centre of our territory, it does not seem to be often met with by collectors. It was found by Nuttall, in 1834, when on the Wyeth expedition, he says ‘on the Black Hills towards the source of the Platte in latitude 41°, Flowering in April and May probably, as, according to Dr. Richardson, the flower is formed in the autumn 192 TOWNSENDIA SERICEA.—SILKY TOWNSEND FLOWER. and expands the following spring.” Dr. C. E. Parry found it in 1861 in the Rocky Mountains, about the head waters of South Clear Creek ; and about the same time and near the same place it was found by Hall and Harbor. Mr. Brandegee has collected it in southern Colorado, and as already noted it has been found in the Indian Territory, if Prof. Wood’s 7. Wdlcoxiana is the same thing. Townsendia was so named by Sir W. J. Hooker in honor of David Townsend, cashier in the same bank in West Chester, Pennsylvania, of which the celebrated Dr. Darlington was Presi- dent, and who, though he wrote nothing, was one of the best botanists of his time, and had an especial knowledge of Astera- ccous plants. In this especially, as well as for a free distribution of specimens to European botanists, they were glad in this pleasant way to make acknowledgments. He died at West Chester, Pennsylvania, December 6th, 1858, in his seventy- first year; preceding but by a few years his life-long friend and companion, Dr. Darlington, who died on the 22d of April, 1863, in his eighty-first year—the two having rendered West Chester famous in the botanical annals of America, and both being com- memorated in distinctively American plants which bear their names, EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLaTe. 1. A full-sized plant. 2. Side view showing the almost globular involucre. 3. Ray floret with pappus and young achene enlarged. 4. Enlarged disk floret. 5. Pollen grain enlarged 270 times. 6. Side view of a branch, with side view of flowers, showing its proportionate length with the leaves. SERIES IL Vou. 1 | POLYPODIUM FALCATUM, SICKLE-LEAVED POLYPOD, OR LIQUORICE FERN, NATURAL ORDER, FILICES, POLYPODIUM FALCATUM, Kellogg.—Frond deeply pinnatifid, segments alternate, long lance falcate, alternate, acuminate, doubly serrate, upper and lower divisions smaller by degrees, terminating above in a long slender acumination. Sori numerous, twenty to twenty-four in‘two rows, one on each side of the mid-rib, rachis glabrous, from one to one and a half feet in height. Root compressed tuberculate, one-fourth to one-eighth inch broad, greenish russet color, branching laterally, radicles numerous, rhizoma often covered with scales. (Dr. Kellogg in the Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences, for December, 1854; see also Zaton’s Ferns of North America.) N a recent work on a curious order of water plants known wg] as Chara—‘Characeee Americane’”—the author, Dr. Allen, quotes a distinguished student of the lower orders of vegetation, Alexander Braun, as saying: “So long as I knew but few forms of the Gymopodee, their distinction was easy, but when it became necessary to distinguish sixteen or eighteen forms, I concluded to consider them all varieties of a single species.” This extract from one of the most celebrated of German botanists shows that even those who have penetrated the deepest into the mysteries of plant life have no definite idea of what determines a species. If some accident had destroyed all the individuals comprising a dozen of the intermediate forms, so as to leave only the extremes, we see that Braun would have regarded these extremes as distinct species; but because the intermediates had not been destroyed, and thus affording a chain of close relationships, they are all regarded as of one species. Now most botanists have had the experience with ferns that Braun had with Characee. The less we know of any species the (193) 194 POLYPODIUM FALCATUM.—SICKLE-LEAVED POLYPOD. more likely we are to make new ones. The ferns of the Atlantic States have been so well studied that any novel form is soon ~ referred to some well-known species ; but the ferns of the Pacific coast are not so well known, and thus when some peculiar-look- ing individuals are met with it is uncertain what the botanist will do with them. Our present plant is as yet one of these doubt- ful plants. It was first brought to notice by Dr. Kellogg, who exhibited specimens to the California Academy of Sciences, December 11th, 1854, from Mr. Swan, of Shoalwater Bay, Wash- ington Territory, and who named and described it as Polypodium falcaium at the meeting following, December 18th. Next we find it in Professor Eaton’s hand from specimens received from Lieutenant A. V. Kautz, of the United States army, who collected it in Southwestern Oregon. Professor Eaton seems not to have detected the identity of these specimens with Kellogg’s descrip- tion, and so gave ita new name and description as /olypodium glycyrhiza in “Silliman’s American Journal of Science and Arts” for November, 1856 (vol. 22, p. 138), and not in July, as he states in his “ Ferns of North America.” Then the writer of this was furnished with excellent fresh specimens by Mrs. Fanny E. Briggs from LaCentre, Washington Territory, from which our drawing was chiefly made; and the only other record of any specimens that we have at hand is in the “check list of North American Ferns in Davenport Herbarium of the Massachusetts Horti- cultural Society,” where specimens are reported as from “Oregon, 1875; and from Washington Territory, 1876, Joseph Howell.” It will ke seen from this how very little is known of this fern, and from this it comes about that some authors write of it as “probably a variety of Polypodium Calrfornicum,’ others as “probably a variety of Polypodium vulgare,’ and others, as for instance Professor Eaton, as a distinct species. It is not our purpose to illustrate what may finally be considered mere varieties in our “Flowers and Ferns of the United States,” as no doubt many of the Pacific forms will come to be regarded; so we give this because, with Professor Eaton, we believe its specific POLYPCDIUM FALCATUM. —SICKLE-LEAVED POLYPOD. 195 distinctness will be finally agreed upon. It will be seen from our plate that it agrees with Polypodium Californicum in the pellucid veins which thicken as they terminate (Fig. 3, a). From Poly- podium vulgare it differs in the thin, papery texture and glaucous hue of the fronds, and the falcate form of the divisions in the more vigorous specimens (Fig, 2). Beyond all this there is one very important difference if Professor Eaton’s account under “P. glycyrliza” be correct. As every fern collector knows, he has not to wait sf A . till the light of sming Comes from the sun, with zephyrs and with showers, Waking the earth to beauty, and the woods To music, and the atmosphere to blow, Sweetly and calmly, with its breath of balm,” as Percival would say, before he can collect perfect specimens of Poelypodiun vulgare for examination, for it is an evergreen, and is even in best condition in the winter season if the frosts are not too severe and the place of growth too exposed; but this species Eaton says has annual fronds, and this from their thin, filmy character is probably correct. That itis nearer to P. Caltfornicum than to P. vulgare we find also suggested by one of our own cor- respondents, Dr. C. L. Andrews, of Santa Cruz, California, who, under date of April 16th, 1878, says: “Polypodium falcatum | take to be a variety of our P. Californicum (tntermedium), having the habit of P. vulgare.” Of this habit Mrs. Fanny E. Briggs says in the Gardener's Monthly for March, 1879, “it grows in moss on trees and logs with FPolypodium intermedium, and is known as ‘ Wild-Licorice.’’ Eaton that it has “aerial rootlets, having a sweet flavor like that i Lieutenant Kautz tells Professor of licorice.” In his ‘Ferns of North America,” and wherein he expresses his opinion that it is a distinct species, Professor Eaton says he “has not seen the root stocks.” Dr. Kellogg, in the original account in the “Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences,” says: “It is highly esteemed as a medicine, both among the natives and others, thought to be antisyphilitic, also used in the preparation of {96 POLYPODIUM FALCATUM. —SICKLE-LEAVED POLYPOD. tobacco, imparting to it a sweetish licorice flavor. The Polypody upon oak trees was famous among the ancients for the cure of melancholy and madness.” It is epiphytic on old decayed trees, stumps and roots, and clefts of rocks,—indeed we should imagine much as the /o/y- podium vulgare is. It probably grows rather stronger than the species last named. Mr. Lunzer, our artist, who was kindly per- mitted to examine a specimen under cultivation in the Cambridge Botanic Garden, Massachusetts, found some of the fronds with their stipes about eighteen inches long. The experience in this garden leads to the belief that the plant will adapt itself easily to cultivation, and the facts we have given in regard to its native locations will help the cultivator. EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATE. 1. A rather young plant from Washington Territory furnished by Mrs. Fanny E. Briggs. 2. A full-grown frond from a specimen grown in the Cam- bridge Botanic Garden. 3. Portion of pinnule enlarged, showing the position of the sori on the veins, and the thickening of the ends of the (pellucid) veins at a. tS aes rere Pest a See, ‘ é Seah ot “f de REALS ae be