922 



correspond with Mr. Wilson's figure {d, p. 919), and even with greater 

 breadth in proportion to its length than that figure exhibits. There 

 is, however, one part in which I have never observed any variation ; 

 and I have taken great pains to verify my observations on this point, 

 because they are at variance with the figure given by Mr. Leighton, 

 and the descriptions of most botanists ; I allude to the enlarged base 

 of the style, which is quite as constant, though not so conspicuous, 

 in this species as in either C. vulpina or C. paniculata; but there is 

 no constriction in the lower part of the enlargement, as there is in the 

 two species last mentioned. In stating that the base of the style of 

 C. teretiuscula is always enlarged, I am happy to be supported by the 

 valuable testimony of Mr. Wilson, in whose figure d is shown the 

 style with its enlarged base. Schkuhr also has accurately figured 

 the nut of this species {I, in tab. D, 19), both in its outline and the 

 swollen base of the style. 



The figure of the perigynium of C. teretiuscula in Leighton's ' Flo- 

 ra of Shropshire' represents that part more cordate at the base than 

 Mr. Wilson's sketch, [c. Phytol. 919). In this respect also I have 

 observed considerable variations from what may be looked upon as 

 the normal form, which variations, as I have before stated, I am in- 

 clined to attribute to a difference in the state of maturity. The num- 

 ber of ribs on the outer side is also variable in a certain degree. The 

 beak is scarcely notched, never deeply cloven, and its marginal wings 

 are narrow, green and serrulate. 



With respect to the root of this species there appears to be a slight 

 diversity of opinion among botanists. For while Smith and Leighton 

 agree in calling the root " slightly creeping," and the former author 

 says it is "not densely tufted," and the latter that it is "slightly creep- 

 ing into scattered simple not dense tufts," — Mr. Babington describes 

 it as "forming scattered simple tufts, not truly creeping." From this 

 it is, I think, evident that the root, like the inflorescence, is liable to 

 be modified by local and other circumstances ; and it appears to me 

 not at all wonderful that these circumstances should also occasionally 

 produce such changes in the habit and general appearance of this 

 species, as well as of others belonging to the same group, as would 

 cause considerable perplexity to a botanist, and lead him to conclude 

 that he had found something new on seeing the plant for the first time 

 in its modified form. Such circumstances, I doubt not, have operat- 

 ed on the plant named Carex pseudo-paradoxa by Mr. Gibson, and 

 caused the deviations from what I believe to be the normal form, that 

 have led that botanist to describe the plant as a new species. The 



