1901] Fernald, — Northeastern Carices 45 
Grahami are the same as the plant of Scotland and Northeastern 
America, a view already broached by Prof. Bailey. 
Among the puzzling forms of this group collected by Messrs. 
A. H. & C. E. Smith at the outlet of Moosehead Lake was one 
plant which was doubtfully referred by Wm. Boott to Carex rotun- 
data, Wahlenberg, of Scandinavia. The plant was so treated in the 
fifth edition of Gray's Manual, and in his Synopsis of the Genus 
Carex' Prof. Bailey interpreted it in a similar way. Subsequently, 
however, the American specimens have been referred by him to C. 
miliaris. C. rotundata of Wahlenberg has always been a little-known 
and poorly understood species. Much of the European material so 
named is referable to C. saxatilis and perhaps to our American C. 
compacta. In the Gray Herbarium there is, however, one sheet 
which may be taken as authentic. One of the specimens collected 
by Wahlenberg, himself, was sent by Francis Boott to his brother, 
William Boott. By these authors the specimen was accepted as 
authentic, as it was also by Olney who wrote upon the sheet “ The 
plant from Wahl. just typical C. rotundata." A second specimen, 
from Greenland, is a perfect match for Wahlenberg's plant, and the 
Moosehead plant, though immature, is habitally like it, and the 
perigynia in their texture and nervation are essentially the same 
It is still doubtful, however, whether the species is truly distinct 
from C. saxatilis and C. miliaris. 
For many years the commonest form of the plant now passing as 
Carex utriculata was treated by both American and European 
authors as identical with the European C. rostrata, Stokes (C. ampul- 
lacea, Good.). Under the second of these purely synonymous names 
the plant was described by Carey in four editions of Gray's Manual. 
The plate of C. ampullacea in Francis Boott's great monograph was 
drawn from a Saskatchewan specimen, and Professor Bailey in 1886 
treated the American and the European plants as identical. Sub- 
sequently, however, he maintained that the American plant is distinct 
from the European in its “ grosser habit, lack of stoloniferous char- 
acter, broader and proportionately shorter leaves, heavier and more 
scattered spikes, of which the lower are less peduncled, and much 
sharper scales."? A careful study of much material fails to con- 
vince the writer, however, that the medium-sized form of the Ameri- 
! Proc. Am. Acad. xxii (1886), 67. ? Mem. Torr. Club, i. 60. 
