335 



cles of Arenaria found in that county are there phiced luider four different generic 

 names ; the Arenaria rubra of Smith being Lepigonum rubrum in Leighton's Flora 

 -and the Alsine rubra of the Edinburgh Society's new Catalogue. — Samuel Gibson ; 

 Hebden Bridge, August 15, 1842. 



214. Note on Carex axillaris and remota. Allow me to return my best thanks for 

 the information given by Mr. Wilson on the two Carices, (Phytol. 299). I have care- 

 fully looked over the descriptions and separated the characters assigned to each ; and 

 leaving out all the superfluous matter they will stand thus : — 



1. Carex axillaris. Leaves flattened. Bracteas variable in length, second very 

 small, with a membranous base, upper part rough, veiy narrow and awn-like, all of 

 tliem auricled at the base. Rachis perfectly straight, with three rough angles. Glumes 

 roundish-ovate, tipped with a very short rough point. 



2. Carex remota. Leaves bent in at the sides, so as to be almost semicylindrical. 

 Bracteas generally with a pale very obscure ligula, passing completely round the com- 

 mon stalk. \_Rachis'] zigzag, in the upper part with two rough angles. Glumes ovate- 

 iicuminate, narrower than the fruit. 



Mr. Wilson tells us that the rachis in remota is zigzag, and in axillaris perfectly 

 straight. Dr. Wood tells us that the lower bractea in axillaris forms as it were a con- 

 tinuation of the stem as regards its direction. Now if the Dr. be correct in this point 

 the stem must be pushed out to give room for the spikelet, and therefore would be at 

 variance with Mr. W.'s straight rachis. Mr. W. tells us that the leaves in axillaris 

 arejlat^ the Dr. tells us that they are channelled — but stop, perhaps I am leaving out 

 .something of importance, he says ^^ plane though channelled," &c. ; here I am a loss to 

 know how a plane leaf can be channelled. Whatever praise might be due to Dr. 

 Goodenough from his first paper on our British Carices, I do think that he robbed him- 

 self of such praise by writing the following passage. — " 1 have stated axillaris as hav- 

 ing the capsule divided at the summit, and remota as having it entire ; but this is not 

 constant. I believe all Carices dispose of their seeds by the opening of the point of 

 their capsule, this opening is observable in some very early, in others not till quite old. 

 In the fomier the capsule is described as opening ; in the latter, because it is not seen 

 but in very advanced age, it is mentioned as closed." — (Trans. Linn. Soc. iii. 76). 

 Whatever Mr. W. may think of the above passage, it was written when the subject 

 had, or at least ought to have been, fully investigated. However Mr. W. may be sur- 

 prised at my opinion on what Dr. Goodenough has said on the capsules of our Carices, 

 I now say that if ever he had investigated the fruit of one Carex, he would have known 

 that when the fruit is first formed, that the opening, if there be any, is very conspicu- 

 ous, and may be seen surrounding the style, with the stigmas protruding therefrom ; 

 and as soon as the capsule is discernible, it will be seen whether its beak be entire or 

 cloven, as it never changes in that respect after it is first formed. So far as regards 

 my quotation from the ' English [British] Flora,' I would ask Mr. W. if Sir W. J. 

 Hooker had not accurately described C. axillaris in the first edition of that work, or 

 has he conected himself in order that his description may better agree with that of Sir 

 James Edward Smith.? Mr. W. tells us that the bracteas in C. axillaris are by no 

 means constant in their length ; if he be correct in this, Sir W. Hooker had made no 

 mistake, and therefore we could have no need of any such correction. Mr. W. tells 

 us that the passage I have quoted from the ' English Flora' without the word "per- 

 haps,'' is sheer nonsense ; I would say that the passage as it stands in the ' English 

 Flora ' is something very like nonsense, for it amounts to nothing more than to say it 



