1898—1902. No.16.] FLOW. PLANTS AND FERNS OF N..wW. GREENLAND. 97 
very imperfect, or Gray may not have had any opportunity of verifying 
all the identifications. Moreover there is the statement of MreHan quoted 
above under C. misandra, that specimens of GC. atrala were brought 
home by Bessexs. As the collector himself has only one species of 
Carex in his list, it is hardly possible to reconcile two such different 
statements, and hardly possible that even MesHan could have made such 
a mistake. 
The safest way, I think, will be to leave the plant in question out 
of the list, until better evidence is forthcoming. Under such circum- 
stances it may seem unprofitable to speculate further upon the real na- 
ture of the plant in question; but if it really does belong to the form- 
series of C. dioica, it is evidently not the main form, but either C. gy- 
nocrates, Wormsks., which is found in Danish Greenland up to lat. 69° 16’, 
or C. dioica var. parallela, Larst. (which should be regarded as a 
separate species), which is found in Scoresby Sound on the east coast. 
OstenFELD, Fl. Arct., p. 61, has referred it to the former. 
Elyna Bellardi, (Aut.) Kocu. 
EL. Bellardi, Simons, Fl. Ellesm. ([Kobresia scirpina, Mrenan, 
Contr. Greenl.]. 
The great, habitual similarity of this plant to Carex nardina, in 
whose company it grows on dry rock-ledges, in gravelly plains, etc., 
probably accounts for its absence from all lists of N. W. Greenland 
plants except that of Mernan. 
Occurrence. S. Inglefield Gulf: M’Cormick Bay (MEEHAN); Foulke 
Fjord: Reindeer Point (231, 1489). 
Eriophorum Scheuchzeri, Horre. 
E. Scheuchzeri, Simmons, Fl. Ellesm. [£. Scheuchzeri, Natuorst, 
N. W. Gronl.; Werner, List 1894; E. capitatum, Duranp, Pl. Kan.; 
Harr, Bot. Br. Pol. Exp.; E. vaginatum, Bessets, Exp. Pol. Amer. et 
Amer. Nordpol-Exp.; Hart, 1. ¢.]. 
As appears from the special synonymic here given, the plant in 
question figures not only under the two names of E. Scheuchzeri and 
E. capitatum, which are in fact synonymous, but also under the false 
name of E. vaginatum. I have previously explained (I. c., p. 149—150) the 
probable cause for this mistake. Indeed Harr (I. c., p. 39) has both in 
his list, but J have sought in vain for specimens of E. vaginatum in the 
7 
