St. Louis Ausust 5, 1866 
Dear Braun, 
Thanks for both letters from June 28 and July 9,which arrived 
us (% EP.) 
Huly 20 resp. August 2. I am sorry,that I receive J. pehlescus \ Hi 
only now, that I went into print. J- peleseus (? E-p)is entirely dif- 
ferent from ours, and is a southamerican 6 ERTL rush,and I 
must come back to the name acuminatus. Therefor, as I said under Nb 
call it . Olktumninaru$ I Even for this one I miss original speci- 
mens. My requests to Dr. Reiser for it remained unanswered.. 
How I enjoyed those quickly following letters from you, thoush 
the first was short, but the last provided that much more. I am an- 
xious fro your judsement about the flower position of the one-flowered 
rushes. The little Californian I. califorrica (formerly called 
) shows also 1,2 and 3-flowers containing heads. I hope,you 
will agree with me, 
Since therletter,wfith you have answered, I sent vou two letters 
abottt Isoetes, on June 24 brineing you new material and today I may 
possibly launch one. Because I again received fine material.. 
Mr. Wm.M. Canby of Wilmineston Delaware, who collected for me there 
at the end of May and in June, shipped again a fine case. Now, one 
more item. Durien ‚as Durant writes to me, created confusion,when he 
says od Isoetes muricata,that it grows together with I. Engelm. near 
EN EG nenne 
Woban; the livine plants had been collected by Canby,ard both T.Ene.. 
and I. mur,which went together, probably had to come from Canby. 
Canby writes the same to me:.but says that he does not know muricata, 
but obtained it from Boott. 
Confusion I Another mistake of Durien is, that he says, I had 
sent him I. Braunii,live specimens. I only saw and collected them in 
1826 (could be 1846, a line has been dram throush several lines of 
the letter, making decipherinz impossible or nearly so. E.D.) I will 
6 7 8 9 10 MISSOURI 
| BOTANICAL 
copyright reserved GARDEN 
