246 NOTES ON CAREX. 



C. LEPORiNA L. var. capitata Sond. Fl. Dan. t. 23G6 (1843) ; 

 Bonder, Fl. Hamh. 489 (1851); Prahl. Krit. Fl. Hol.-Sch. 236 

 (1890). Andersson quotes (('yp. Sc. 64 (1849)) Herb. Norm. f. 8, 

 no. 77, for it. Mr. Miller gathered this in W. Sutherland in 1881, 

 but has only recently sent it to me among many other Carices. It 

 resembles C. /estiva Dewey {Sill. Journ. 29, 246(1836)), a rare 

 arctic species. Bonder observes on it: "hat 3-5 dichtstehende, 

 brauuliche Aehren und dadurch eine grosse Aehnlichkeit mit 

 C.fcstica Dewey " {Fl. Hamb. 489). 



C. FuscA All. FL Peel. ii. 269 (1785). C. poh/gama Schk. Biedyr. 

 i. 84, t. 76 (1801), teste L. H. Bailey. C. Bja-bauDiii Wahlb. Kongl. 

 Ac. Handl. 24, 163 (1803). 



C. HuDsoNii Ar. Benn. in Lond. Cat. ed. 9, 41 (1895). C.stricta 

 Good.! Trans. Linn. Soc. ii. 196 (1794), t. 21, f. 9. C. stricta Lam. 

 Diet. Bot. iii. 387 (1789), antedates Goodenough's name, and is the 

 American C. anr/ustata Boott in Hook. Fl. Bor. Am. ii. 218. 

 Var. TURFOSA. C. turfnsa Fries, Bot. Not. 104 (1843). 

 C. ACUTA L., var. prolixa Hartra. Hand. Sk. Fl. ed. 4 (1843). 

 C. proli.va Fries, Nov. Mant. iii. 150 (1842). In this the spikes are 

 slightly drooping ; the glumes, although described as subulate- 

 cuspidate, are not so, like the waritinuv section, but gradually taper 

 from the base to the apex, from half as long again to twice as long 

 as the first. The habit is neater than in acuta. I have this from 

 Norfolk {Priest), and in Herb. Brit. Mus. are specimens from 

 Cambridgeshire gathered by Newbould. 



C. ACUTA L. ft. MINOR Led. Fl. Boss. iv. 314 (1853). G. tricostata 

 Fries, Nov. Mant. iii. 152 (1842). Andersson refers to this C.ccespi- 

 tosa ft. altissima Aspegr. Ijleh. Fl. 67 (1823), and C strieta var. 

 fluriatilis Laest. in Nov. Art. Upsal. xi. 286 (1839). It is exactly the 

 reverse of proli.va : the glumes of the female spikes are only half 

 the length of the fruit, and blunt, the bracts less foliaceous, and the 

 habit of the plant like that of stricta. I have specimens named by 

 Dr. Christ as above from Ireland {S. A. Steivart). 



C. EtGiDA Good, in Trans. Linn. Soc. ii. 193, t. 22 (1794). The 

 original specimens in Goodenough's herbarium at Kew are about 

 equal to what Fries called var. sa.vatilis ; our small curved plant is 

 similar to his (jlacialis. In Journ. Bot. 1890, pp. 171-3, Prof. L. H. 

 Bailey makes rigida the type of a composite species, which includes 

 Goodenoivii Gay, rigida Good., and various others; and remarks: 

 "There is so gradual a blending of types from the top of Mount 

 Washington, where C. hyperborea grows, to the adjacent sea-coast, 

 where C. vulgaris is common, that there can be no doubt as to the 

 specific identity of the two plants." This may be the case in 

 America, but is not borne out in Great Britain. It is rare that 

 there is any difficulty in separating ('. /■////(/(/ from Goodenoivii, even 

 when growing at the same elevation in Scotland. I am by no means 

 averse from combining species which one can see the reason for so 

 doing, but among the many hundreds of specimens that I have seen 

 this combination does not seem to be justifiable. To my eyes Prof. 

 Bailey separates some American species from others the distinctness 



