264 
namely, that of careful consideration and discussion of species, rather than of the 
indiscriminate collection of large quantities of fungi. The species in question 
was decided to be Cortinarius muciflwus, which subsequent reference to Fries’ 
Teones, t. 148, f. 1, confirmed. 
Amongst the many critical species which came under discussion at these 
meetings, were the following :—Agaricus cucumis and pisctodorus. The former is 
said to have saffron-coloured gills, and to smell of cucumber; the latter to have 
pink spores and the odour of rancid fish—the gills are spoken of as “‘gilvo incar- 
natus demum fulvellus.” One would think these characters marked enough to 
make the recognition of these two species a question of no difficulty. It must be 
understood that in colour and general habit, place of growth, &c., they both 
resemble each other. But the smell surely will distinguish them, it may be 
thought—there can be no resemblance between rancid or putrid fish and cucumber. 
Unfortunately, however, the plant we find commonly in this country has the fishy 
odour when first gathered, but in the course of a few hours, as the plant dries, it 
passes into a distinct cucumber odour. Then it may be suggested that the colour 
of the spores should be compared. The spores are not so abundant in our plant as 
they are in many Agarics, but when collected on white. paper they are of a pinkish 
yellow. Whatever the mycological public may think of us, we are strongly of opi- 
nion that A. cucumis and A. pisciodorus, are two states of one and the same fungus, 
and that A. piceus, Kalch., and A. nigripes, Trog., do not stand on too sure a founda- 
tion. Fries says of A. piceus, ‘‘Odor cucumerinus vel piscinus,” and Kalchbrenner’s 
figure might very well have been taken from a short-stemmed specimen of our plant; 
while Fries’ figure of A. nigripes, with its yellow flesh-coloured gills, “‘foetore piscis 
putridi,” might equally well have been taken from a largespecimen. Could we but 
find these four species all growing side by side at the same time, the question would 
be easy enough to settle, but as it is we must do the best we can. There may be 
four species, or there may be only one. There was another species which some 
thought was Agaricus (Flammula) inops, and others A. (Hypholoma) epixanthus. 
Tt was also a species in which the spores are few in quantity ; but whoever may 
be right in the matter of description, in Fries’ Icones, our plant is figured under the 
name of inopus, as any one may see who cares to turn to t. 118, fig. 1. Lactarius 
seriflwus and camphoratus are often confounded, but, as was shown at these meet- 
ings, the former has a dark brownish pileus, and much paler gills, with a shade of 
yellow on them ; the figure in Berkeley’s Outlines, t. 18, f. 4, shows the colour of 
the pileus well, but is too dark in the gills; while camphoratus is a small species 
with the pileus inclining to dark brick-red. They both smell alike when fresh, ~ 
but camphoratus develops when dry a powerful odour of melilot. The var. Swartzii 
of A. fibula and the A. setipes of Fries seem to us certainly identical, and we also 
fail in our endeavours to separate Cantharellus tubeformis, and infundibuliformis. 
Mr. Stevenson pointed out that we had often confounded A. ammoniacus with 
A, alealinus. 
But to return to the Whitcliff Woods. Mr. Stevenson gathered A. (Flam- 
mula) lentus, Pers., and soon after Thelephora Sowerbet, Cortinarius hematochelis, 
Lactarius pargamenus (hitherto confounded by us with Z. piperatus, but easily 
