78 
I should have liked, because, as the Loch was then much higher 
than in the previous year, and darker in colour, I could only 
gather from the great masses driven ashore, and these had been 
rather long uprooted to be in good condition. — W. Barclay. 
Carex diandra Schrank, var. major Koch ( = C. Ehrhartiana 
Hoppe). Seaman’s Moss Pits, near Timperley, Cheshire, v.c. 58, col- 
lected June 1853 by the late John Hardy, of Manchester. These 
examples may be interesting to the members, as being collected 
more than sixty years ago from a locality where it is now extinct. 
(See Mr. S. H. Bickham’s note in the “ Journ. Bot.”, 1917, pp. 113, 
195). — Charles Bailey. This is certainly the plant figured as such 
in Syme’s “English Botany,” ed. 3, but it does not agree with 
descriptions, and is only a tall, drawn up form (or state) of the 
type. — E.S.M. Correct, I believe, but this variety has of recent 
years dropped out of our British lists as unworthy to rank as a 
variety. (See Reports, 1900 — 01, p. 30, and 1901 — 2, p. 22). 
Ascherson and G-raebner (also Rouy) mention a variety major 
Koch, of which they consider Ehrhartiana Hoppe a synonym. 
Mr. Hardy’s plant does not agree with Gibson’s description of his 
pseudo-par adoxa, although it is from the same station (see “Journ. 
Bot.”, 1916, p. 16). In view of Gibson’s statement that his new 
species occurred near Malham Tarn, it is worth placing on record 
that Messrs. Pearsall & Lumb have recently sent me an example 
of true C. paradoxa from this lake, gathered by a game-keeper 
about 1909. — C.E.S. 
C. vulpina L., var. nemorosa Lej. (Ref. No. 290). Hedge- 
bank, Bury Common, W. Sussex, v.c. 13, June 18, 1917. — W. C. 
Barton. Yes ; a shade-form or var. of vulpina, which = C. nemo- 
rosa Rebentisch. — E.S.M. The usual reference given for this 
Carex var. is either Willdenow (1805) or Rebentisch (1804), in 
either case published as a species. So far as one can judge, 
Lejeune, in his “ Rev. fl. env. de Spa,” p. 193 (1824), seems to have 
been the first to place it as a variety. He remarks (p. 251), “Le 
Carex nemorosa Willd., qui se trouve dans nos bois, ne peut-etre 
consid^re, comme l’a fait M. de Candolle, que comme une 
variate du C. mdpina L. indiquee dans ma ‘ Revue ’ sous le No. 
1336.” Asch. et Graeb. “Syn. mitteleurop. Fl.”, p. 37 (1902), 
quote it from Koch, “Syn.”, ed. 2, 866 (1844), as a variety. I 
rather think that Boott, in his “ Cyperacese,” considers there are 
two forms under this variety, or that the name is used for a form 
it does not belong to, but I have not access to his work here. 
But do not these specimens rather come under the var. interrupta 
Peterm. ? — A.B. 
