176 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 
to it at the time. It was with some surprise that when I came to 
go through my Scotch gatherings, and later on my Derbyshire 
ones, I found that these three plants were identical, and, moreover, 
did not seem to agree with anything I knew. The very fact, how- 
ever, of the triple occurrence seemed to dasa the probability of 
the 
the plant being anything out of common, and I could only 
suppose it to be som . — _— common moss whose identity had 
eluded me on acc its ual habit ent a specimen to 
Is 
Prof. Barker, thinking that os mi might have ‘observed it in his study 
of the Derbyshire mosses, — however, was not the case. He 
pointed out, speae ete the resembla the cpa on of 
densum J in Lim richt’s s Seana and on comparison I felt 
m 
continental plant, including a fragment of the original plant 
y Arnold in Franconia, and the identity of our moss 
with ae ‘ap at once established. 
g through our Inchnadamph collections some months 
be oS that there is a close, indeed an almost exact 
similasity in the character of all the four stations described; in each 
ices an den Winden der Kalkhéhlen ... .;” thus agreeing very 
closely in this go Fee with A. Sprucei, which, however, is not con- 
fined s such localitie 
w proceed to establish the identity of our European moss, 
Deacdgt tesa or Amblystegium densum, with the North American 
A. compactum. The latter plant, it may be remembered 
recorded from Auvergne by Frére Héribaud (v. Rev. Bryol. 1896, 
a setabead ietin M. Lac henebe: of Lin oges, a specimen of this 
moss, gathered by Frére Héribaud in Auvergne, i in Angoat, 1895. 
An examination of this specimen at once convinced me e that it was 
really identical with B. densum, with which indeed it agreed in 
— respect. The habitat, too—sur les parois d’une grot tte ”’ 
the su ubstratum, a calcareous sphek exactly fitted in with 
Moly examine any specimens he might have of the Auv ae 
ng and see whether, in his opinion, it was not actually referable 
to 
