1042 



feet nuts : and, fifthly, I find them with the peduncle of a fertile spike 

 jDassing through the beak of one or more of their perigyniums ; this 

 character is common in the different forms of what is called C. Good- 

 enovii. When in this state I find the perigyniums insensibly passing 

 into what are called scales or glumes ; and on the other hand, I find 

 the glumes insensibly passing into what are called the bracteas ; and 

 again, I find these bracteas in the same insensible manner passing in- 

 to what are called the leaves. Thus we have perigyniums, glumes, 

 bracteas and leaves, so closely connected that it is impossible to tell 

 where to strike the line of distinction. 



I now turn to Mr. Luxford's note (Phytol. 918), and as I only study 

 plants &c. in their natural habits, I do not know what Mr. L. means 

 us to understand by his reference " to our domesticated animals and 

 our cultivated plants and fruits." But I must say that I am somewhat 

 surprised at Mr. Luxford's notion of a natural group of Carices, when 

 I find that he has put Carex vulpina alongside of C. paniculata &c. : 

 and I am also surprised to find him saying that " the inflorescence of 

 Carex vulpina is tolerably constant," as I do not know of any Carex 

 that is more inconstant in its mode of inflorescence. And so far as 

 its natural affinities are concerned, I think that it would have been 

 better placed with such species as muricata, divulsa, &c. 



And as / do not study figures, I will pass over those of Mr. Wilson 

 and the others which have been " copied from Leighton's ' Flora of 

 Shropshire,' " by just saying that I have never seen the mature nut of 

 a Carex that has any resemblance to Mr. Wilson's fig. d ; but on the 

 contrary, I say that no figure could be made more correctly to repre- 

 sent the MATURE nut of C. teretiuscula than that of Mr. Leighton. 



As one who studies plants, I would advise such persons as are in 

 the habit of making figures that should represent such characters as 

 the swollen base of the style of a Carex, while standing on the nut, 

 just to make some mark whereby we may distinguish the style from 

 the nut itself; or perhaps we might mistake the whole of the nut for 

 part of the style. 



For an account of the discovery of Carex paradoxa in Yorkshire, 

 Mr. Luxford refers us to a note by Mr. Spruce, (Phytol. 842). So far 

 as regards the discovery of this plant, it is a matter of little or no im- 

 portance, but what has been said on the subject would, I think, have 

 been much better, if it had been correct. Mr. Spruce says, " it was 

 first found by myself in Heslington fields, in April, 1841, and a few 

 weeks after in Ascham bogs." Here I could inform Mr. Spruce when 

 and by whom this plant had been found in Yorkshire long before the 



