310 Mr. J. E. Brcueno’s Observations 
plant, as marks to distinguish this from the preceding species. 
It is very plentiful in those places on the coast subject to be 
overflowed by the sea, and varies very much in size. Virgil's 
epithet, *' limosus juncus," applies to most of this family, but to 
none more forcibly than this. The Flor. Dan. figure 431, and 
Morison's sect. viii. t. 9. f. 11. resemble this more than the last. 
The names of Lob. 18., Ger. 18. 1., Ger. em. 21.4., and Park.1270.6., 
correspond much. better with J. cwnosus than with J. squarrosus ; 
and indeed Ray, in the first edition of his Synopsis, so applied 
them: but was afterwards induced to change his opinion by the 
observations of Dr. Plukenet (vid. Philosophical Letters of Ray, 
p. 232.), who says, *' I must needs acknowledge that I am not a 
little entangled in my thoughts about the Juncus parous cum peri- 
carpiis rotundis, J. B., which though you are pleased to make the 
same with the Gram. junc. marit. Lob., 1 cannot easily obtain 
with myself a compliance herein, but do rather accept it as the 
Juncus acutus Cambro-britannic. Park., and which I take to bea 
true and genuine Rush, as you most truly have observed. But 
unto this you are pleased to apply the Junc. Cambro-brit., Park. 
(h. e.), Gr. junc. maritim., Lob., whose Icon of it (and indeed so 
do those of all other authors) agrees exactly with our Moss- Rush, 
the capsules whereof are somewhat elongated and pinched in to- 
wards the top, resembling more a cone than a globe, the capsules 
of the former being more accurately round, according as its name 
imports.” Ray, however, in his second edition of the Synopsis, 
states, that though he agrees with Dr. P. in rejecting the syno- 
nyms of Bauhin, which he had before quoted, he could not as- 
sent to this being the Juncus acutus alpinus Cambro-britanicus, 
Park. It induced him, nevertheless, to omit this synonym under 
J. squarrosus, to which, in the first edition, he had appropriated 
it—a change which I cannot but think was erroneous. If the di- 
stinction of the two plants J. compressus and cenosus be admitted, 
the 
