BY J. H. MAIDEN AND E. BETCHE. 317 



When Mr. Bauerlen collected the specimen 20 years ago, it was 

 sent for determination to Baron von Mueller who regarded it as 

 a new species, and gave it an MS. name, but never published a 

 description, though he briefly described it in the Melbourne Her- 

 barium. The late Mr. Luehmann sent us a copy of the following 

 original description by Mueller, but mispelled in part, and past 

 full recognition of his meaning — " Culmis 3-8 cm. longis, capilla- 

 ceis, monocephalis; spiculis 2-1 bracteatis, 4 mm. longis; glumis 

 ovatis, subacutis, acute carinatis, teneris, minute acantala p], 

 leve straminea aut brunescente." 



" S. cartilagineus Benth., Fl. Austr. Vol.7, p. 328, partim. 



S. inundatns Benth., Fl. Austr. Vol.7, p. 329, partim. 



W. Australia : Swan River, Drummond. 



Victoria: Murray River, F.v.M.; Bugle Range, F.v.M. 



N. S. Wales : Cobham Lakes, W. Bauerlen." 



The mark of interrogation at the word acantala is ours; though 

 we have not seen the original label, Mr. Luehmann insisted that 

 the word is a correct copy. 



The Baron's MS. name cannot be maintained, as there are 

 already three other species with the same name in the ' Index 

 Kewensis,' though all are synonj^ms; and it is not advisable to 

 add a fourth to the number. 



In 1902 Mr. R. T. Baker sent specimens to Kew for deter- 

 mination. Mr. C. B. Clarke, the well-known authority on Cyper- 

 acese, declined to describe it, but he kindly gave his advice that 

 it might be regarded as a form of S. cernuus Vahl, a cosmopolitan 

 species, from which it differs only in trifling points, as its very 

 small nut and ^piculate glume; though, on the other hand, so 

 many species of Scirpus have been described on trifling differences 

 that it might be described as a new species without inviting 

 adverse criticism. 



Mr. Baker kindly placed the correspondence and the plant at 

 our disposal. Mr. C. B. Clarke came to the same conclusion as 

 F. v. Mueller, though he had not seen his MS. description, that 

 Bentham included the plant under S. cartilagineus and under 

 S. inundatns, though it will not match either. 



