94 
Monmouthshire, Radnorshire and Breconshire, being sparingly distributed through 
these counties. 
25. Carex binervis, Sm. Four Districts. This cannot be expected to be 
a common plant in a county containing so little of heath and mountain as our own. 
The Llanthony District seems the only one in which it is common; and there, 
though fairly abundant on the Ffwddog, and on the Cusop hill, I have never met 
with it on the Hatterel range. It seems to be absent from the Malvern hills, 
where, or in the Districts adjoining, we should have expected its presence to have 
been recorded. It occurs on Welsh Newton Common, and in more than one spot 
in the Ross District, where it is a remnant of a bygone vegetation. 
26. Carex distans, Z. Two Districts. The occurrence of this Sedge is 
interesting, as it is almost exclusively a maritime species. D. Boswell in Eng. 
Bot., Ed. vii., does not say a word about its occurring in inland stations. Mr. 
Watson, in Yop. Bot., treats its occurrence away from the sea as still (in 1874) an 
open question. Since that time however it has been recorded for Hertfordshire, 
Warwick, and south-west Yorkshire. In Herefordshire, it was found first as 
early as 1853, by Mr. Purchas, at Plowfield; who however did not at that time re- 
cognise it as distans. In 1879 I found it, in company with Mr. B. M. Watkins, 
on the Canal bank, near Hereford. It is thus certainly an inland, and certainly 
a Herefordshire plant ; though its stations in our county are likely enough to have 
been destroyed already, or to be destroyed in a few years. 
27. Carex fulva, Good; with the var. speirostachya. Eight Districts. 
This plant is locally plentiful, and the explanation of its not occurring in more 
Districts seems to be that it requires unbroken marsh land, which, in Hereford- 
shire, does not exist in abundance. I cannot presume to distinguish between 
this type and its variety, especially after specimens from a single Herefordshire 
station have had both names assigned to them, in different years, by the author- 
ities of the Exchange Club. But we certainly have a second plant in Hereford- 
shire, falling under C. fulva, Good, which is decidedly and at once distinct from 
the ordinary one, by its tufted root-stock throwing up abundant herbage of a 
lighter green. The flowering stems are correspondingly poorly developed, and 
the fruit not well formed. This plant, which I found in 1880, on the Hereford- 
shire face of the Ffwddog, and again on the same range, just within Breconshire, 
is, I believe, Dr. Boswell’s Var. C. stertlis, which he treats as a hybrid. I do not 
think that C. zanthocarpa, found by Dr. Pryor in Hertfordshire (see Bot. Journ. for 
1876, p. 365), can be identical with this, though our plant agrees with the Hert- 
fordshire plant in the light tufted foliage, and the absence of the white membrane 
connecting the beaks of the fruit. True xanthocarpa is a plant which should be 
looked for in Herefordshire. 
28. Carex flava, Z.; with the variety lepidocarpa. Thirteen Districts 
(really, no doubt, all). Of this plant we certainly have several forms. The plant 
with a deflexed beak, which I take for true flava, occurs in several places, but it is 
perhaps not so common as that with a nearly-straight beak. This latter again 
varies considerably in the size and shape of the fruit; but all belonging, I believe, 
to the variety usually termed lepidocarpa. The true C. @deri, Ehrh., I have 
7 
ee ee te 
