132 BRYOLOGY OF NEW ZEALAND. 
very way except in one respect—to be sure, a vital one—viz., that he 
Sausibs the calyptra as “ parva.” If this were the case the plant could 
not, of course, well be considered a Hennediella, and I must admit that 
the question is perplexing. However, Beckett’s specimens “ ell, 
Jan., 1888,’ the identical gathering from which C. Miiller described his 
marginata, contains two and only two plants—one a more robust plant 
with long, large, scarcely exserted capsules quite ‘‘ bruchioid”’ in appear- 
ance, corresponding to Beckettia bruchiordes, the other a much smaller minute 
plant, with considerably smaller, quite exserted capsules ; this is certainly 
P. marginata C. M., and is equally certainly a Hennediella, agreeing, as. 
mentioned above, with H. ‘maponladle (R Br. ter.). Now, most of the 
moss, or more pislakly that he had the actual calyptra before him but 
would not be altogether inappropriate. The calyptra, moreover, is cer- 
tainly smaller and much less conspicuous than in the other plant mixed 
with it. 
Brotherus separates H. bruchioides C. M. from the remaining species as 
having the “lid not differentiated,” C. Miiller ae described his Beckettia 
as belonging to the Phascaceae, with “ Capsula pha ascacea minuta, as. 
rimo visu cum Bruchia facile commutanda.” Now, this is perfectly 
true of the appearance of the “— plant (H. getdate sn especially 1 
the specimen—sent to C. Miiller—of Bell’s collecting; but microscopical 
examination shows that the lid is emily diffasantingad and separable, 
while other, deoperculate specimens (none of which, no doubt, reached 
C. Miller) show in a rather remarkable manner that, minute as the lid 
appears while the capsule is ieintiataiee, by the time the fruit is ripened 
and the lid separates it is quite wide-mouthed, and ripe deoperculate capsules. 
agree in shape exactly with those of the smaller species (P. marginata C. M. 
= H. microphylla), and are, in fact, Pottioid in appearance. The capsule 
is quite gymnostomous and the spores 16-22 p in diameter. 
_ Beckett, as I have ee gives his aoe name to the gery in 
pre t 
Hennediella, R. Brown havin ing published his descriptions in a paper which, 
curiously enough, immediately precedes Beckett’s paper in the same volume, 
only four pages. separating 
The series of plants mounted by Beckett shows, as I have net 
a perplexing aentiarts, between the two plants associated together, 
should not be at all surprised if it ultimately transpires that all id of 
Hennediella belong to one variable species. ave found no structural 
differences, and the length of seta and de of exsertion of the capsule 
_ is most perplexingly variable. None of Beckett’s plants have He capsule 
raion though in some the leaves attain to the base of t psule. 
may be argued that these should be referred ve sage 8 7 ‘otra 
and that his H. macrophylla with immersed capsules ented 
here at all. But Beckett’s larger plant has the a ae sas size of 
