3i2 Harper: COASTAL PLAIN OF THE CAROLINAS 
pocosins, especially in Hampton and Williamsburg counties, 5S. C., 
and Columbus, Brunswick, New Hanover, Pender, Duplin, Wayne 
and Edgecombe counties, N. C., it is represented chiefly by low 
bushes, often very abundant, just as in many places in the Alta- 
maha Grit region of Georgia.* Arborescent specimens were also 
seen in non-alluvial swamps in Columbus, Brunswick, ie 
and perhaps other counties. 
PLANERA AQUATICA (Walt.) Gmel. 
Observed only in the swamps of the Santee, Black and Peedee 
rivers, in Berkeley, Williamsburg, Florence and Marion counties, 
S. C. (Michaux noted the same species on the Santee River, a 
little higher up than where I crossed it, on April 20, 1795, and 
April 10, 1796.) Its kabitat is thus much like that of latanus 
occidentalis, though its distribution is quite different in one respect, 
for it is very nearly confined to the coastal plain, but not altogether 
to the largest streams. It is one of those species which seems to 
center in the Mississippi embayment of the coastal plain, and does 
not extend as far northeast as Virginia. 
Quercus CATESBAEI Michx. 
I noted this tree in most of the counties passed through south- 
west of Goldsboro, N. C., and then did not see it again until I 
passed the sand-hills of the Blackwater River near Zuni, Isle of 
Wight County, Virginia (half way between Norfolk and Peters- 
burg), where it seems to be quite abundant, though of small size. 
As I was traveling about 40 miles an hour at the time, and secured 
no specimens, some persons may be reluctant to admit it to the 
flora of the “Manual region” without more evidence. I notice 
however that Pinchot & Ashe report it from Gates County, N. C. 
(one of the northern tier of counties), which would lead one to 
expect it in Virginia, even though their map of its range does not 
correspond with this statement. 
FAGUS AMERICANA Sweet 
This common tree was seen only a few times in South Caro- 
lina and Virginia, and not at all in North Carolina. This is not 
*See Ann. N. Y. Ac cad. ‘Sci. 17: 59, 239, 333. 1906. ° Its dimorphism as to 
size has also been briefly mentioned by Pinchot & Ash 
See Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 17: 246; Bull. Nes Club 33: 534- 1906 5 
Torreya 7: 44; Science II. 25: 541. 1907. 
ar i he 
ae ie Sc ma aA ea seh ce aE a St a 
bia gala 
