— New York State College of Agriculture At Cornell University Ithaca, N.Y. Library HBRARY ANNEX Date Due Library Bureau Cat. No. 1137 Cornell University Library QK 306.B11F Flora of Cambri Wi AT 31 001 671 902 924 mann Huntingdon + i y+ ee Lynn A MAP CAMBRIDGESHIRE to shew the + Wisbech BoTanicaL DISTRICTS, oe used in the _ ‘ a (Mori et af the i Cou) x. Ouse W Metcalfe, Litho Cambridge Flora of Cambridgeshire: OR A CATALOGUE OF PLANTS FOUND IN Che County of Cambridge, WITH REFERENCES TO FORMER CATALOGUES, AND THE LOCALITIES OF THE RARER SPECIES. BY CHARLES CARDALE BABINGTON, M.A. F.RS. F.LS. &. “Turpe est in patria vivere et patriam ignorare.” Lrny. LONDON: JOHN VAN VOORST, PATERNOSTER ROW, 1860. 306 BIE Cambridge : PRINTED BY wu uv. CLAY, MA. AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. @ 2asrf PREFACE. AN interval of two hundred years has elapsed since the publication by the celebrated Ray of the first Catalogue of the plants found in the county of Cambridge, and forty since the third and last edition of Relhan’s Flora Canta- brigiensis appeared. As even the latter of these works has now become nearly obsolete, owing to the great advances which have been made in Botany since Relhan wrote, a new Catalogue seems to be desirable. I therefore venture to place the present work before botanists notwithstanding its many imperfections. The list contained in this book is the result of my own researches, extending over a long period, combined with those of other botanists, who have kindly informed me of their discoveries and usually directed me to the spots where the plants grew. When I have seen the plant in any loca- lity, the station is usually recorded as resting upon my own authority; for I unfortunately many times neglected to make a note of the name of my original informant. Those 2 1V PREFACE. to whom I am the most indebted in this respect are Pro- fessor Henslow, the Rev. W. H. Coleman (one of the authors of the Flora Hertfordiensis), the Rev. W. W. Newbould, Mr 8. W. Wanton, M.A., Mr D. Britten and Mr H. Fordham, of Royston, Mr Algernon Peckover and family and Mr J. Balding, of Wisbech, Miss A. M. Barnard, formerly of Odsey, Mr W. Marshall, of Ely, and Mr G. 8. Gibson, of Saffron Walden. Prof. Henslow permitted me to make use of his interleaved and annotated copy of Relhan’s Fora. Mr Wanton, who most assiduously traced out and confirmed a great number of Relhan’s localities of plants, allowed me to transcribe all his notes. Mr Coleman left an extensive list of the localities of plants in the hands of the Rev. F. W. Collison, late Fellow of St John’s College, who transferred it to me. Mr Newbould has given me the greatest possible assistance by the communication of notes and specimens; indeed without his help I could not have now ventured to offer this book to botanists. The appearance of his initial upon nearly every page will shew the great extent and value of his contributions. Messrs Britten and Fordham have supplied very full lists of the plants found near Roys- ton. Miss Barnard, grand-niece of the late Sir J. E. Smith, sent a catalogue of plants found about Odsey, at the extreme south-western corner of the county. Mr Peckover and members of his family added largely to the Flora of Wis- bech, to which Mr Balding also made a valuable contribu- tion. To Mr Marshall I am indebted for many localities of PREFACE. v plants in the Isle of Ely. And to Mr G. 8. Gibson for notes concerning the plants inhabiting the south-eastern part of the county. Mr Relhan, son of the author of the Flora, placed in my hands a copy of that book containing a few additions made by his father. A copy of the second volume of the first edition of Berkenhout’s Outlines of the Natural History of Great Britain and Ireland has fallen into my hands, which belonged to “J. Fisher, B.A. of Christ’s College,” shortly after its publication in 1770. Very many localities for Cambridgeshire plants, noticed apparently by him, are recorded in the margins of this book. He seems to have been the Dr John Fisher, LL.D. who subscribed for a copy of the first edition of the Flora Cantabrigiensis in 1785, and the stations were probably nearly all communicated to Relhan. It is a curious list, and shews the great extent of Dr Fisher’s researches. His name deserves to be recorded as an active contributor to our knowledge of the local Flora. A few plants from Cambridgeshire are preserved, with their localities, in Relhan’s Herbarium, which now belongs to the Linnean Society of London. Unfortunately the great majority of his specimens have no notes of the places where they were found appended to them. The Herbarium is thus rendered of very little value. There are also some curious entries made by Mr R. Jackson in a copy of Martyn’s Methodus preserved in the library of Trinity College: occasionally they are dated 1730. a3 vi PREFACE. Mr Jackson is not mentioned in the list of those 118 men “who, though they never published anything upon the sub- ject, have nevertheless contributed in some degree to im- prove this part of the natural history of their native coun- try,” which is given by Professor T. Martyn in his Plante Cantabrigienses. But the Rev. Richard Jackson, the founder of the Jacksonian Professorship, was a Fellow of Trinity College, and took his B.A. degree in the year 1727, his M.A. in 1731. That he took an interest in Botany is shewn by his founding a perpetual annuity to be paid to the “head or chief gardener of the University Physic Garden,” and by several of the directions given for the guidance of his Pro- fessor. In all probability he was the R. Jackson to whom the Methodus belonged. It is hoped, and earnestly requested, that those botanists who may use this Catalogue will communicate to me any additional localities that they may observe, or any confirma- tion of the older ones, and point out such improvements in the book as may occur to them. St Joun’s CoLLecr, CAMBRIDGE. 26 April, 1860, INTRODUCTION. 4 THose botanists who have resided in the University having for at least two hundred years made the Flora of Cambridgeshire a subject of study, many works relating especially to it have issued from the press. It will be well to give some account of them. They commence with the celebrated and singularly excellent Catalogus Plantarum circa Cantabrigiam nascentium of Ray, which was published in the year 1660. This forms a small 12mo volume of 182° pages; and, after deducting all the plants which were culti- vated or otherwise do not come within the plan of the pre- sent Flora, it contains 671 plants found in this county by Ray. The names are arranged alphabetically, and this, in addition to the obscurity attendant upon the old nomen- clature of plants, renders the book rather difficult to con- sult. In 1663 Ray published an Appendix of 13 pages, in which 37 plants were added; and of this a second edition, consisting of 30 pages, was edited by Mr Peter Dent, an apothecary of Cambridge, in 1685. Mr Dent inserted in this edition 59 more plants unnoticed in the Catalogus. These additions are made almost wholly in the words of Vili INTRODUCTION. Ray, as found in his Catalogus Plantarwm Anglie. Con- cerning this botanist Ray remarks, “D. Pet. Dent, Medicus pharmacopeus Cantabrigiensis, insignis botanicus et vetus amicus noster.” Hist. Plant. ii. 856. These Appendices, especially the second edition, have long been of great rarity. In 1670 Ray published his Catalogus Plantarum Anglic, and in 1677 he issued a second edition of it. He states in the Preface that as all the copies of the Cat. Pl. Cantabr. were sold, he had contemplated a new edition of that book, but had ultimately determined to extend its range so as to include “totius Britannie stirpium ;” but at the same time to render it convenient for use at the University by marking the plants of Cambridgeshire. Accordingly, if we take account solely of the plants to the names of which there is prefixed a “C,” we have a second and a third edition of the Catalogus Pl. Cantabr. in these two editions of the Cat. Pl. Angliec. The seventeen years intervening between the first and last of these publications did not add very much to the Flora of this county; but it must be remembered that Ray was deprived of his Fellowship by the Bartholomew