DR. H. F. HANCE ON NORTH-CHINA PLANTS. 89 
tremely like, that in the dried state, at least, I do not see how the 
two can be distinguished, except by the achene and style. In 
this connexion it is singular, and perhaps suggestive, that Peking 
specimens of Scirpus maritimus, L., are apparently always di- 
stigmatic. 
51. CYPERUS DIFFORMIS, L.—Circa Peking, 1869, collegit Dr. S. W. 
Williams. 
Not mentioned in the * Index Flore Pekinensis.’ 
52. Scrrpus MICHELIANUS, L.—Peking, 1869, legit Dr. Williams. 
Not included by Maximowicz in the ‘ Index.’ 
53. CAREX SIDEROSTICTA, sp. nov. Radice e fibris numerosis longis 
pallide fuscis glabris contexta, culmis pedalibus strigoso-hirtis inferne 
vaginis subscariosis nervosis crebre ferrugineo-punctatis tectis, foliis 
omnibus radicalibus culmo dimidio brevioribus vel eum fere ad:equan- 
tibus acutis parenchymate laxe celluloso plurinerviis margine minute 
serrulatis nervis setoso-hirtis 4-5 lin. latis, spicis circ. 5 androgynis 
basi foemineis apice masculis inferioribus exserte superioribus 
subincluse pedunculatis, bracteis vaginantibus inflatis vix foliaceis 
glabris nervosis ferrugineo-punctatis, floribus inferioribus distantibus, 
perigyniis oblongis compressis viridibus longitudinaliter albido-ner- 
vosis glabris breviter et obtuse rostratis ore integro squama oblongo- 
lanceolata acuta trinervi extra nervos laterales late albo-marginata 
ferrugineo-punctata paulo brevioribus, achenio pallido elliptico tri- 
gono, stigmatibus 3 longis tomentosis.—In silvis montanis, Jehol, 
Aprili flf. invenit Rev. P. Arm. David. (Exsicc. n. 15599.) 
Although I have devoted a good deal of time to the study of 
this plant, aided by the classical works of Schkuhr, Kunze, Drejer, 
Anderson, and the splendid * Illustrations ’ of Dr. Boott, and have 
compared it with a considerable suite of specimens, I am not sa- 
tisfied as to its position. It belongs to $ 23 of Steudel's arrange- 
ment, which is merely an analytical clavis—and might, from the 
characters given, fall into either the fourteenth or twentieth of 
Kunth's classification. I suspect its affinity to be with the group 
to which C. pedunculata, Muhl., belongs, though it is not a near 
ally of that species. The genus, however, is so wonderfully 
rich in variety of types, and there is such divergence of opinion as 
to a natural arrangement amongst Caricologists, that it is most 
difficult, in many cases, to judge of the relationship of a sedge ; 
and the excessive multiplication of subdivisions by Fries, Carey, 
and others in no small degree augments this difficulty. Drejer 
well observes (Symbol. Caricol. 16), * gregum in infinitum multi- 
