This species is, in every part, twice the size of the foregoing, of which it has, till now, been considered as a variety, whose greater luxuriance, or more dilated habit, was attributed to its situation in a more favourable climate. Into this error I have been led in the Flora Britannica, where therefore a number of erroneous synonyms are accumulated; but the description belongs precisely to the T. palustris, except perhaps what regards the bracteas and fruit. So much are we frequently disposed to see with the eyes of others, that it was not before I had compared the figure in English Botany with that of Redouté, both cited, together in Hort. Kew., that I was obliged to correct my opinion. After making all imaginable allowance for possible inaccuracy in the two artists, however excellent; and for the one plate being taken from a wild specimen, the other from a most luxuriant garden plant; nothing seemed to justify a conclusion of their belonging to one species. A more close examination of the plants themselves immediately removed all uncertainty. Besides the difference of size, as above mentioned, the root of what I have now named T. alpina is much thicker in proportion, and more woody. The stem bears two distant leaves, of which the uppermost especially is much smaller than the radical ones, and if situated more than half way up the stem, it diminishes in proportion. But the most satisfactory differences exist in the flowers. The inflorescence is a cluster (racemus), from one to two inches long, frequently interrupted or scattered. The partial stalks, though short and thick, are always distinctly present, having a concave permanent solitary bractea, about their own length, at the base; and as the fruit advances they become more evident, a line or more in length, and curved upward. The calyx is close to the rest of the flower, cup-shaped, unequally and rather slightly
