The following argument, ufed by my friend Dawfon Turner, to prove that 

 C. nodulofa of the Flora Anglica fliould be made a fynonym of this fpecies, 

 appears to me fo conclufive, that I have adopted it without hefitation. " It 

 has been fuppofed that Mr. Lightfoot was the firft botanical author who 

 noticed this fpecies. A fuppofition that feems juftified from his making no 

 reference to Dillenius, and from his C. diaphana being introduced as a new 

 plant in the Appendix to the Flora Anglica. This idea is however very erro- 

 neous, for from the Dillenian Herbarium, in which good fpecimens are preferved, 

 it is clear that this is the No. 40 of the Hiftoria Mufcorum, and confequcntly the 

 C. nodulofa of Hudfon, by the admiflion of which, a great deal of confufion, 

 with refpe£t to references, is done away, and a plant that has always been 

 confidered one of the moft doubtful among botanifts is clearly eftablifhed." The 

 fpecimen correfponding with No. 4 1 , to which Hudfon refers as his C. purpu- 

 rafcens, is a fmall variety of this fpecies, but Hudfon's defcription is fo fhort that 

 it will equally apply to many other fpecies. 



It adheres but flightly to either glafs or paper. 



A. C. diaphana, natural fize. 



B. Ditto, magnified 2. 



