ARTICLE XIX.—On the Flora of Hamilton and its vicinity. By JUDGE LOGIE.

(Read to the Botanical Society of Canada; Kingston, 28th March, 1861.)

There are probably few places in Canada where the study of Botany can be prosecuted with greater advantage than in the neighbourhood of Hamilton, or where the botanist will be more amply rewarded for his labours, by the number and variety of plants he will be able to collect.

The climate at the head of Lake Ontario, and particularly of the strip of land lying between the high table land or mountain as it is called, in rear of the city of Hamilton, and extending from the Niagara River round the head of the lake as far as Wellington Square, is milder than the climate of most other parts of the Province. The peach and some of the other more tender kinds of fruit, grow and thrive there, and many trees and plants not to be found in the colder parts of the Province are indigenous. Among these I may mention the black walnut, (Juglans nigra,) a large and handsome tree. Few of a large size are now to be found in the neighbourhood of Hamilton, though in a smaller form it is common; it is found also in the low rich lands of some of the western townships, but does not, so far as I can learn, extend to the east much beyond Hamilton. The tulip tree, (Lirioden dron tulipifera,) is also found in several places in the neighbourhood of Hamilton: there are two large trees near the Railway Station, and last summer I found a very large tree having a diameter of nearly five feet, in the township of Glanford, some miles to the south of Hamilton. I have not heard of its being found in Canada, except near Hamilton and towards the Niagara River. The American plane tree or button wood, (Platanus occidentalis,) is said to be the largest North American tree except the Wellingtonia gigantea of California; none of those that I have seen, however, are so large as the tulip tree I have mentioned, or the large pine and walnut trees I have seen. The sweet chestnut, (Castanea vesca,) is very abundant, particularly on the hill sides in the neighbourhood of Ancaster, some miles to the west of Hamilton. The flowering dogwood (Cornus florida,) is common in the same locality, and in various other places. The Sassafras officinale is also common in the neighbourhood of Ancaster, in East Flamborough, on Prince's Island, and other places. In addition to

these we have most of the trees common in other parts of Canada.

Among the smaller plants and flowers found in the neighbourhood of Hamilton, I will briefly enumerate some of those most abundant in the different localities near the city. In the spring, besides the flowers common everywhere, such as the Hepatica triloba, Trillium erectum, Aquilegia Canadensis, Arum triphyllum, and some others, I have found growing on the sides of the mountain in great numbers Claytonia Virginica, Asarum Canadense, Erythronium Americanum, Sanguinaria Canadensis, Hydrophyllum Virginicum, Dicentra cucullaria, and Dicentra Canadensis, also several species of Cruciferæ, such as Cardamine rhomboidea, Cardamine Virginica, Dentaria laciniata, and Dentaria diphylla. On the other side of Burlington Bay, I found early in the spring Symplocarpus fætida, several species of Anemone, and later in the season several species of Pyrola, Lobelia spicata, Lobelia syphilitica, Ceanothus Americanus, several species of Vaccinium, also several species of Gerardia.

On Prince's Island, (which however is not an island,) Gillenia trifoliata and Diervilla trifida are very common. I have also found there Sisyrinchium officinale, Collinsonia Canadensis, Polygala Senega, Polygala Nuttallii, Hypoxis erecta, Cypripedium pubescens, several species of Platanthera, Gentiana crinita, Apios tuberosa, two species of Lespideza, and several species of Gerardia.

On the sands of Burlington Beach, Polanisia graveolens and Datura Stramonium are to be found in abundance, and in the waters of Burlington Bay at the beach, besides the Nymphæs odorata and Nuphar advena, (the white and yellow water lilies,) Sagittaria variabilis, Ranunculus aquatilis, and several species of Potamogeton are common. Zizania aquatica or wild rice, Pontederia cordata and Nesæa verticillata are also found.

On the shores of Lake Medad, a small lake about 10 miles from Hamilton, and in a sphagnous bog near Milgrove, I found Sarracenia purpurea, (the pitcher plant,) Calypso borealis, Cypripedium spectabile, Pogonia ophioglossoides, Moneses uniflora, Dalibarda repens, Calla palustris, Coptis trifolia, Linnæa borealis, Ledum latifolium, Cornus Canadensis, and some others.

[Judge Logie submitted a systematic list of the Flora of Hamilton, accompanied by a very large collection of preserved specimens, which were most beautifully prepared, and excited much

interest among the members. His list will be printed at length, with special localities, &c., for the various species, in the Annals of the Botanical Society, part II.]

ARTICLE XX.-The Great Comet of 1861.

(From advanced sheets of Silliman's Journal, Sept. 1861.)

The suddenness of the apparition of the comet in northern latitudes was one of the most impressive of its characteristics, On the 2d of July after the twilight had disappeared, the head, to the naked eye, was much brighter than a star of the first magnitude, if only the effective impression be taken into account, although as to intensity it was far inferior to a Lyræ, or even to a Ursa Majoris. I should describe the head as nearly equal in brightness to that of the great comet of 1858 between the 30th of September and the 5th of October; it should be considered, however, that the present comet was better situated, from its higher position above the horizon at the end of twilight.

The aspect of the tail suggested a resemblance to the comet of March, 1843. It was a narrow, straight ray, projected to a distance of one hundred and six degrees (106°) from the nucleus, being easily distinguishable quite up to the borders of the milky way. The boundaries for the most part were well defined and easily traced among the stars. It was not until after two or three hours of observation, that I could gain a clear comprehension of the structure of the tail or tails as they presented themselves to the naked eye and through a small opera-glass. It was then evident that a diffuse, dim light with very uncertain outlines, apparently composed of hazy filaments, swept off in a strong curve towards the stars in the tail of Ursa Major-the southern edge directed as low as towards Mizar. This was evidently a broad curved tail, intersected on its curved side at the distance of a few degrees from the nucleus by the long straight ray which at the first glance, from its greatly superior brightness, seemed alone to constitute the tail. The two were in fact counterparts of the principal tail and the supplementary rays of the great comet of 1858, with this remarkable difference, that in the latter the straight rays were so far inferior in brightness to the curved tail as to have been recognized at only three observatories, those of Poulkova, Göttingen, and Cambridge, U. S.-while with the

present comet, the predominating feature was the straight ray to which the curved tail seemed scarcely more than a wisp-like ap pendage.

On further scrutiny with the aid of an opera-glass, two sharply cut and very narrow dark channels, bounding the principal ray, could be traced for ten or fifteen degrees from the nucleus; while outside of them, on either side, were two additional faint rays. The whole issue of nebulous matter from the nucleus far into the tail was curiously grooved and striated. It was noticed that both the principal ray and the dark channels penetrated within the outline of the curved tail, the latter being clearly separated from the principal ray even to the naked eye by a dark cleft just above their intersection. The well-defined margin of the principal ray admitted of a very exact delineation, even as far as a Ophiuchi, 100° from its origin.

On the third, the bright rays and dark channels were traced to a distance of 40° from the nucleus, the principal ray to nearly 100°. Five or six alternations were distinguished, besides the hazy filaments constituting the curved tail. Some of the streaks could be traced quite up to the nucleus. The rays were not only separated by the dark channel parallel to their axis, but they were disconnected at intervals in the direction of their length.

On the fourth, there were two or more regions of contrary flexure on the north following margin of the ray, which, in a theoretical point of view, are of very great interest when taken in connection with the direction of the ray almost precisely in a great circle from the sun continued through the nucleus. This peculiarity presented itself still more decisively on the 5th, when the tortuous path of the ray could not be overlooked.

The very singular aspect of the northern edge of the principal ray for the first thirty or forty degrees of its course, attracted particular attention, and the charts were revised with all possible care. The sky was perfectly clear and the outlines so distinct that there could be no room for doubt as to the reality of the reflexure of the curve. Subsequently on projecting an arc of a great circle from the sun through the nucleus, it was found to lie clearly within the margin of the ray as far as a distance of thirty degrees (30°) from the nucleus, and there was still haziness beyond it almost to the distance of sixty degrees (60°). The charts on other dates indicate similar results, but the data cannot be properly

discussed without requiring more labour than can be, at present, devoted to them.

Within the last few days the principal ray in the part near the nucleus, has assumed a more regular sweep in the direction opposed to that of the diffuse tail, which now reaches nearly to the centre of Corona Borealis, scarcely changing the course of its southern limit between x and Bootis and Coronæ Borealis from

night to night.

The telescopic phenomena, though interesting, have not presented equally strongly defined features with those which characterized the great comet of 1858. We should perhaps except from this remark their structure for a day or two after their first emission from the nucleus. In this stage they were intersected by jets of luminous matter projected from the nucleus, and these limits were pretty clearly outlined.

On the 2d, portions of three were visible; the inner one showing a variety of details. In its outline and general aspect it was, like others which followed it, almost a fac simile on an enlarged scale of some of those exhibited by the great comet of 1858. They rapidly faded, or were lost in the surrounding haze and their places were filled by new ones. Latterly, two, at most, could be seen at one time. It is quite important to remark that the successive envelopes resembled their predecessors not only in their general aspect but quite closely in the details of their structure; the luminous jets not issuing at random from all points alike of the nucleus, but continuing to follow a nearly similar course at each new discharge from its surface.

The most natural inference from this would seem to be that the nucleus, if it rotates at all upon an axis, does so very slowly. Of the pendulum-like vibrations of the luminous sectors ascribed by Bessel to the comet of Halley, nothing was seen; although the opportunity of witnessing them, had they existed, was very favorable, as the sectors were well displayed.

The nucleus was throughout brilliant, and, to appearance, solid, with a diameter of from 2" to 3".

The disposition of the nebulosity in the part of the tail contiguous to the head was nearly uniform throughout; the axial darkness being scarcely distinguishable, excepting on one occasion, July 3d.

The following positions have been derived from comparisons with neighbouring stars.