E 
B 
1918] Long,— American Record of Scirpus mucronatus 47 
the plant upon the basis of the published record, without having seen 
material — the specimen in the cover of Scirpus debilis having long 
before this time become completely dissociated from the “Scirpus 
mucronatus” collection.' 
On one of the Charles E. Smith labels is the memo, “See Gray under 
S. Torreyi.” In the first edition of Gray’s Manual of 1848, and the 
succeeding early editions, following Scirpus Torreyi is the note: 
“S mucronatus, L., should it ever be found in the country, will be 
known by its leafless sheaths, conglomerate head of many spikes, 
stout involucral leaf bent to one side, &c., &c.”” — no doubt inserted 
because of the reference, immediately above, to “S. mucronatus, 
Pursh? Torr. Fl. N. Y.” in the synonymy of S. Torreyi. To this 
somewhat unfortunate note — or rather, perhaps, the unfortunate 
‘interpretation of it — is without doubt due the suggestion in the minds 
of the original collectors that the Rhoads’ Swamp plant was to be 
identified with Scirpus mucronatus. Whether the elimination of this 
note in 1867 from the fifth edition of the Manual was owing to a 
realization of its somewhat misleading character — recognized through 
the matter of the Smiths’ “Scirpus mucronatus” from Delaware 
County — cannot be asserted positively, but would seem not unlikely. 
It must certainly have been connected with some radical change of 
ideas about the species. 
The assertion in the latter part of Dr. Britton’s note on Scirpus 
mucronatus that “Mr. Martindale has it from the ballast grounds at 
Camden” was thought worthy of investigation. So many strange 
plants have been ‘associated with the old ballast grounds that this 
statement suggested the possibility of a veritable occurrence of this 
species in America — interesting at least historically. Search in the 
Martindale Herbarium at the Philadelphia College of Pharmacy 
showed a specimen bearing the label: “Scirpus debilis Pursh = 
S. supinus, Ballast, Camden, N. J., June, 1877, Isaac C. Martindale.” 
The identification has been corrected to S. mucronatus in the hand of 
Dr. Britton. The material, a single, whole individual, clean and 
1 For this reason, in the preparation of Gray’s New Manual, no specimen was found under 
S. mucronatus, the species was left in the status of Watson’s treatment, and for want of material 
remained unillustrated. In connection with illustrations, it may be noted that the line drawing 
in the two editions of Britton and Brown’s Illustrated Flora is obviously not an original drawing 
made from the Delaware County material. It accurately represents Scirpus mucronatus L. 
however, and was doubtless made from Old World material, if not copied from some European 
source. 
