1880] BOTANICAL CORRESPONDENCE. 391 



To Professor J. H, Balfour, M.D. 



Cambridge, June 7, 1880. 



Dear Balfour, — It is indeed a very long time since we met. I 

 Jiope now from your letter that you are thinking of being here at 

 the Medical Meeting in August, and that we may then meet again. 

 As there is every probability of our being able to be here at that 

 time, we hope that you will take up your quarters at our house. We 

 •do not now see anything to take us away before that time ; but there 

 is a meeting in Wales immediately after, which I trust will not clash 

 with it. It is one to which I am almost obliged to go. My wife 

 desires to send her very kind regards. She is now, I am thankful to 

 say, very much better. — Yours truly, Charles C. Babington. 



To T. R. Archer Briggs, Esq. 



Gambridoe, Aug. 9, 1880. 



My dear Sir, — I am sorry that you have thought it necessary to 

 send the second copy of the "Flora," but I shall put it into our 

 Botanical Library connected with the Herbarium. You are doing 

 admirably with the Ruhi. I did not know that hirtifolius (Wirtg.) 

 was the same diS pi/ramidalis (Kalt.), but I now see that Focke says 

 that they are very nearly related. I wonder what Genevier called 

 it — for as you have it, it probably grows in his district. It is a 

 happy thing that he lived just long enough to finish the new edition 

 •of his "Monographic." He died almost immediately after it was 

 finished. I am in treaty to obtain his collection of Bubi for our 

 Cambridge Herbarium, and hope to obtain it if they put any 

 reasonable value upon it. I shall be very glad to learn what your 

 other new discovery turns out to be. These two books by Focke and 

 Genevier will entail much work upon me, and if I get the Genevier 

 Herb. Rub. I shall have very fine materials with which to study. — 

 IBelieve me to be, very truly yours, Charles C, Babington. 



To J. E. Griffith, Esq. 



Oct. 7, 1880. 



My dear Sir, — It looks very much as if the Potamogeton 

 ■lanceolatus never did produce fruit. I have failed to find any true 

 fruit on the specimens sent to me when softened, for of course I 

 found them quite dry. If it only increases by offsets it will account 

 for its very local character ; and probably also shew that it is only 

 a form of some other plant ; of what I know not. The report of 

 it from our Cambridgeshire fens I am very doubtful about. I have 

 ■seen no specimens. — Yours truly, Charles C. Babington. 



It is growing in our Garden from specimens sent from Llandudno. 

 I have failed in seeing if there are " two stronger dorsal ribs " on 

 the stipules. Did you look to this 1 It is stated doubtfully in the 

 •"Manual." 



