JUNCUS TENUIS IN KERRY. 835 



This touches on British Botany in this way : — What is the C. 

 rigida v. inferaJpina from Scotland ? My determination of this was 

 confirmed by Dr. Almquist, and I failed to detect any differences in 

 specimens so named in his herbarium. These, however, it must be 

 admitted, were not types ; and Almquist himself, in Hartmann's 

 Skan. Fl. ed. 11, seems hardly to have a very definite opinion of 



C. hyberborea, as he says, " (!. Injherborea Drej. R. car. bor. after 

 the description, and an example from Vahl is principally a dark- 

 glumed form of C. salina p. (i. e., katteyatensis Fr.), with a mixture 

 of similar forms of C. aqiiatilis and rigida.'' 



It may be noted that C. P. Laestadius, in his Bidrag till, 

 kann. Lapp. (1860), has C. hyperborea and rigida inferalpina, and 

 under the former gives a locality from L. L. Laestadius (the author 

 of the Loca Parell., &c.); and Blytt, ' Norges Flora,' gives them as 

 distinct. Prof. Bailey does not actually say he has seen a specimen 

 from Laestadius, but "v. s. Hb. Havn." I have not yet been 

 able to see types myself. If our plant is not ivferalpina, what is it ? — 



D. limula Fries ? Certainly our plant agrees better with the figure 

 of that plant in Fl. Danica (t. supp.), 105, than it does with the 

 one of hyperborea (t. 2482). 



If really an error, this is an instance of what I once affirmed 

 before, " Carices cannot be named unless types are seen." 



In one instance Prof. Bailey is not consistent, i. e., in retaining 

 C. vulgaris Fr. for C. Goodenovii Gay, which name is certainly three 

 years anterior to that of Fries. 



In his ' Synopsis of the North-American Carices,' Prof. Bailey, 

 used the name C. Magellanica Lamarck, for our C. irrigua. By a 

 reference to Lamarck's herb, he confirms this ; our plant must 

 therefore bear Lamarck's name. 



Altogether, Prof. Bailey's paper is one of the most valuable that 

 has ever been contributed to the elucidation of the genus, and it is 

 to be hoped that it will be in the hands of all who care for this 

 difficult but most interesting genus. One can but regret the large 

 amount of name-changing our American confreres will have to face ; 

 but it had better be done at once, although opinions may differ as 

 to the specific value to be placed on some of the forms. 



JUNCUS TENUIS (Willd.) IN KERRY. 

 By Reginald W. Scully, F.L.S. 



While botanising this summer in Kerry, I came across abund- 

 ance of a Juncus which, at the time, was quite new to me. 

 Babington's * Manual ' contained nothing to which I could refer my 

 plant, and it was only some weeks later that I learnt from 

 Mr. Arthur Bennett that the plant was Juncus tenuis (Willd.) As 

 this is a wide extension to the range of a very rare British plant, a 

 short account of its Kerry localities may be interesting. 



I first came across the plant growing abundantly on an old 

 grass-grown road, which runs from Sneem to Caherdaniel, the 



