1(5 
Bailey. In the sixth edition of the ‘ London Catalogue,’ Scirpus par- 
vulus was placed in the list of excluded species, as it was believed to 
be extinct in the only known British locality, namely near Lvmington, 
Hants, where it was found by the Rev. G. E. Smith about 1840 ; the 
discovery of this plant last summer, therefore, on the east coast of 
Ireland, by Mr. A. G. More, was a welcome surprise to British bota- 
nists, and the members of the Botanical Exchange Club will doubtless 
have been gratified at receiving specimens of this species which the 
abundant supply has enabled me to include in every parcel. To Mr. 
More’s admirable paper on S. parvulus in the ‘ Journal of Botany’ for 
1868, p. 321, I have nothing to add in the way of description ; but, 
as both he and Mr. Bailey sent me recent specimens of the plant, I am 
able to confirm the opinion that the plant has no leaves, the supposed 
leaves being evidently barren stems, each surrounded with a very short 
transparent basal sheath, which I could detect only in the recent plant. 
The Club is indebted to the Editor of the ‘ Journal of Botanv ’ for the 
plate prefixed to this Report. 
Scirpus Jluitcuis, Linn. “ A few examples taken from the bed of a 
shallow pool on Ditton Marsh, dried up in 1868, where they were 
growing amid a dense carpet of Pilularia. These examples are without 
flowers, and are sent only to show how little they resemble the true 
Scirpus parvulus, though this latter has been erroneously referred to 
S.Jluitans when not floating in water.” — H. C. Watson. As there 
were not sufficient specimens to send to all the members of the Club, 
a few remarks are necessary. Mr. Watson’s specimens have tufts of 
distichous leaves with sheathing bases, but the stems are undeveloped. 
The leaf-tufts are combined into compound tufts, which are connected 
by the branches of the bare, slender rootstock. It is evident that in 
S.Jluitans the leaves are not imperfectly-developed stems, as Anders- 
son supposes (“ culmi non rite evoluti,” PI. Scand. Cyper. 8). 
Carex ericetorum, Poll. Gogmagog Hills, Cambridge; Mr. F. A. 
lianbury. It is strange that this plant has not been detected in any 
station but the above, as one of the drawings in the plate of C. prcecox 
in ‘ English Botany ’ has been drawn from C. ericetorum. I have 
looked for it on Box Hill, on the Hog’s Back, Surrey, and in the still 
more likely locality near Streatley, Berks, but without success. 
Carex involuta. Hale Moss, Cheshire ; Mr. Spencer Bickham, jun. 
A description appeared from the pen of Mr. J. G. Baker in the Report 
