' The Woody Plants of Kentucky. 5 ‘ L » ‘
L `
l common creeper (Virginia?l, whortleberry, huekleberry, cran- i i
_ p berry. K ·
l In his life of Raflnesque, the author, R. E. Call, intimates that ;
· M’Murtrie secured this list from Rafinesque who was at the time A. .
» ~ actively engaged in studying the botany of Kentucky. If this is t
l  ‘ true it explains in a manner the mountain plants included.  »>
- Rafinesque knew the flora of much of the State, whereas M’Murtrie 4 ·
i aimed to present the flora of the region about Louisville. It seems y _ Q
l ; hardly credible that the great laurel, red elder, mountain laurel E
l and other species noted in the list have ever been found growing I
· · wild at Louisville. » I .
The French-German, Rafinesque, was a` remarkable man in his [   j
,  T prime, of great mental and physical energy. He left a more endur- · E  
1 ; ing mark on the botany of Kentucky than any other pioneer writer. ‘   g
!  i Some of his published species have never been collected by others _` 7
>  T in the State. He was an indefatigable collector at a time when  
i _ the botany of the State was almost untouched either by the lumber-  
’ man, the agiculturist, or the botanist, and thus had opportunities  
, for study in the field not enjoyed by those who followed him. It is  
, _ unfortunate that he was unable somewhere to leave a complete  
f  ¥ record of the work he did while here. He was made professor of fi
f if  natural sciences at the old Transylvania University in 1818, and il'?
_  K for some years thereafter remained in Kentucky. T T  
, In 1833, Doctors Short and Peter, of Lexington, published  
J  V their list of Kentucky plants in the Transylvania Journal of Medi-  
1 “ cine. ln it are about one hnnllrcd and fift_v-three species of woolly '  
) _  plants, some of them probably observed in cultivation. The list  
Q  i €0\’ers the whole State, yet records only about thirty species more  
1 l than M’l\Iurtrie’s Louisville list. This is the most satisfactory ,  
,  T of the old lists, and bears evidence of having had the painstaking  
1 , care which local lists should receive. Both men were gooil botanists.  
   i and appear to have scrutinized the plants of liluegrass l(onlu<·kv ·  
_ t with special thoroness.* ii i 
E  . *lt was my good fortune to know for a brief time Dr. Robert Peter,  
. One of the authors of the ligp He was well along in years, a good gray . lin 
"   milll, \VllOSC·IllO(.lCSly. Ul`IS€lilSl`1llCSS Hllil 1I:l(lll5tl`}' \VCI`C l"llOSl[ [)lCHS[lIli lO.\Vii·  
,7 V Hess. But in a sclhsh world these qualities too often work to the (lIS3(l- ttf
 V ¥?glI§i'—¥§‘ of their possessorsaancl _Dr. Peter has not yet, l think. received  
 3, {nr himeniuclcy the appreciation his patient labor in her interest has earned  
' V