pdf 25 MB - BSBI Archive

360 CORRESPONDENCE.
30. R. ulth(jeifoUns, Host.— (4.) Plentifully by the road ide leaving
Parkgate for the village of Neston. This plant seems to me quite
identical with the prevalent Sussex altlimfolim, which I studied this
year in great plenty from Hove to Worthing. Mr. Eobinson also finds
the plant at Frodsham, in Cheshire, so likely enough it is a common
form of littoral Cheshire. I named a specimen for that gentleman a
few yeai's back, which he had sent to the London Exchange Club,
U. corylifolh(s, fS. conjungens, as I believe Mr. Borrer so named the
Hove plant. I now confess, that as far as altlieeifolius means anything,
I believe both the Cheshire and Sussex plants exactly fit the name
but Mr. Bloxam says, " I rather consider your Hove plant as a variety
of R. coryliforms.'"
31. R. cfBsius, L.— Rare in Cheshire. (7.) The roadside at Biley
Brows, near Middlewich ; the only spot in Cheshire which, beyond
doubt, I have seen it in. I have a specimen of apparently a weak
csesian form from the sandhills at Parkgate, but I am not convinced
that it is, beyond contest, R. casius, so I will leave district 4 blank,
—the weaker forms of R. Cfssins and the " dumetorum " group being at
times so difficult to distinguish. My record of R. casius in the ' Liver-
pool Flora ' must, till I can again get upon our sandhills, be read with
this qualification.
COREESPONDENCE.
On Vernacular Names.
The perusal of Dr. Seemann's article ou ' Vernacular Names ' in the last
number of the Journal, will doubtless direct attention to a much-neglected sub-
ject, though, unfortunately, I was the peg on which the remarks were hung.
At the outset, however, a word of explanation is required. In quoting from
his preface to the ' Nomenclature of the American Flora,' I did not wish to be
understood (and I am sorry if,^nadvertently, I conveyed the impression) that Dr.
Seemann deemed vernacular names the ' end of inquiry,'—my sole object being
to show that they were of great value, and to none more so than to the economic
botanist. From the full quotation given by Dr. Seemann, it will be seen
that he is of the same opinion.
With regard to the term ' Nag-tassar,' it affords to my mind an illustration
of the cai'e that should be taken in dealing with existing native names. In vari-
ous works I found the name always quoted as that of the trees mentioned {Mesua
ferrea, Calysaccion longifolium, etc.), and not as a dye obtained from several
;