-go- 
present case the identification of the Mt. Desert plant as the original source 
of Warnstorf’s type is strongly confirmed by the presence, intermingled with 
both specimens, of the same hepatic, which has been determined by Prof. 
Evans as Lophozici inflata (Huds.) M. A, Howe. It may be mentioned in 
passing, although it must be admitted that in view of the small number of 
botanists who collect hepatics it is at least a doubtful argument in favor of 
Mt. Desert as the type locality of Sphagnum Faxonii , that Lophozia inflata 
has never been reported from Massachusetts. 
As a check upon the accuracy of the data accompanying the specimens 
at the Harvard Cryptogamic Herbarium, Mr. Rand’s Mt. Desert herbarium 
was examined, and, as expected, still more of the characteristic material of 
Sphagnum Faxonii was found, again intermingled with Lophozia inflata. 
Mr. Rand’s herbarium afforded, also, two additional stations for the plant on 
•or near Mt. Desert, — Great Marsh Heath, Sea Wall and Great Cranberry 
Isle. In two cases the labels gave the habitat as “ shallow pools.” The local 
use of the word “Heath ” on Mt. Desert is explained in the introduction to 
Rand and Redfield’s “Flora of Mt. Desert Island, Maine.” Here will also 
be found citation of all the specimens now referred to Sphagnum Faxonii , 
catalogued under vars. plumulosum , submersum and falcatum of Sphagnum 
cuspidatum. 
To determine the relationship of Sphagnum Faxonii with other mem- 
bers of the Cuspidata , which occur in the same region, should prove an in- 
teresting problem to the bryologists of the Josselyn Botanical Society during 
their annual meeting at Mt. Desert in August. 
Cambridge, Mass. 
LICHEN NOTES NO. 12. 
The Cladonia Specimens of “ Lichenes BoreaIi=Americani.” 
G. K. Merrill. 
An attempt is here made to assign to the Cladonia specimens of Miss 
Cummings’ “ Lichenes Boreali-Americani,” their nomenclatural equivalents 
as recognized by Wainio in his Monographia Cladoniarum, Part III. The 
same inquiry is extended to those examples of the “North American 
Lichens” series in my possession. The greater part of the Cladonia mate- 
rial published in the two series is satisfactorily determined where one accepts 
Tuckerman as a guide, but the thought of the elder Fries whom Tuckerman 
follows in his disposition of the Cladonias has long been out of fashion with 
the European Lichenographers, and the tendency has been to make the 
genus more recondite than simple. One hears now and then that Wainio’s 
Monograph is burdened with too much knowledge. The diligent and ex- 
haustive inquirer seldom offers this criticism however, but welcomes informa- 
tion and puts up with the hardships of obtaining it. If it be desirable to 
know anything at all of the subject, it is equally so to know as much as pos- 
sible, and it would certainly be no disadvantage to American Lichenology 
to have our Cladonia forms interpreted in the Wainian point of view, even as 
