= 
on the. Brith Species of Carex. 143 
by all authors, that there is no neceflity of adding to the general 
mafs of defcription. | 
He who would wifh to Sel: good defériptiône of it, would do 
well to confult Mr. Lighifoot’s Flora Scotica, and Mr. Leers s Flora 
Herbornenfis—a book which ought to be in the hands of every 
botanift who wifhes to enter into a praétical ftudy of his fubjeét. 
The figure in Morifon is extremely characteriftic. — Leers gives 
‘the plant i in both a young and mature ftate, together with all the 
parts of fruétification.— Michelius’s figures i in general are to be de- 
pended üpón—but he is nôt faultlefs in his adapting of fynonyms: 
he quotes Mor. figure 22, which is the male dioica, to this plant. 
4 CAREX PAUCIFLOR A. 
C. fpicà fimplici androgyna, floribus foemineis fubternis remotiuf- 
culis patentibus ; mafculo fub-unico terminali, Light ifoot, Fi. 
o Sete $43. fab.vk FR 2. 
C. patüla. Hudf. Fi. Ang. 402. Withering, p. 1027. 
| Habitat in ericetis montofis.  , 
Ihave néver had an opportunity of cultivating this INL or 
of feeing it alive, or even in a frefh ftate. 
Mr. Hudfon «nd Mr. Lightfoot have both defcribed this plant, 
Their defcriptions, although they differ in their mention of the 
number of the flowers, yet agree very well in fetting forth the ge- 
neral habit of the plant, and the fituation of the male and female 
flowers. 
Mr. Lightfoot has given an excátidt figure. As his publication 
was prior to Mr. Hud/fon's, and as his name is more expreffive (and 
that is no flight object), I am an advocate for reftoring the name 
pauciflora. 
I ZA 
