572 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES. 
browner colouring of the spikelets, and the acumination (short but 
distinct) of the perigynium give good evidence of being away from 
C. curta and about half way towards C. echinata. The nuts are more 
undeveloped and smaller than in my Scandinavian specimens, but 
both are alike in being flat, with no substance, i.e., sterile; and I infer 
from this that they are both probably of hybrid origin.”— E. F. Linton. 
“ C. canescens x lagopinaP — G. Kiikenthal. “This combination is 
also suggested for the Scandinavian C. helvola by Christ, and Blytt. 
In my paper on this sedge read before the Einnean Society, 
I have given my reasons for at present being unable to accept it as a 
hybrid of C. canescens x echinata. I hope to get more mature 
specimens, which may help to elucidate the question. Pfarrer 
Kiikenthal’s suggestion is the more likely combination, except for the 
fact that up to the present time C. approximata ( lagopina ) has not 
been recorded from the Breadalbanes.” — G. C. Druce. 
Carex approximata , Hoppe ex. Gaudin, ‘Agrost. Helv.’ ii., p. 107, 
(1811); Hoffm. ‘ Deutsch. FI.,’ p. 200. C. lagopina, Wahl, in ‘Vet. 
Akad. Nya. Handl.,’ Stockh., 1803, 145. Corrie Sneachda, Easterness, 
August 1892. — G. Claridge Druce. 
C. canescens , Linn. ‘Sp. PI.’ (1753), 974. Near Sunningdale, Berks, 
July 1892. Typical. — G. Claridge Druce. 
C. canescens , Linn. ‘Sp. PL,’ 974 (1753), var. In mountain bogs on 
Ben Lawers, at about 3600 feet, August 1897. — G. Claridge Druce. 
“ I consider that this is the var. robnstior , Blytt, which we have been 
wrongly calling alpicola. Is it not better to use the name C. curta , 
Good., which is definite and undoubted ( C. canescens , L., does not appear 
to be so) ? ” — E. S. Marshall. “ There is a good deal to be said for 
either name, but I prefer C. canescens , and I may quote from Andersson’s 
‘Cyperacese Scandinavise,’ p. 58 (1849): ‘ Auctores Anglici Linmeum C. 
canescentis nomine C. hrizoidem , v. C. Buxlmumii , intellisse contendunt, 
quare nostram C. canescentum, C. curtam dixerunt. Quae transmutatis 
nominum e confusione minime insolita speciminum, quae in herbario 
Linn, asservantur, evidenter orta est, quare nomen a botanicis suecicis 
semper adhibitum heic jure recepimus.’ Such authorities as Richter, 
Nyman, the Kew ‘Index,’ the American ‘Check List,’ Christ., and 
Kiikenthal are at one in using the name C. canescens , which in my 
opinion has clearly priority over C. curta , and without any reason- 
able doubt refers to the same plant.” — G. C. Druce. 
Carex sp. Ref. No. 1936. Altnaharra, West Sutherland, 4th 
August 1897. This is, I believe, a new British form. Pfarrer G. 
Kiikenthal, a German specialist on sedges, refers it confidently to 
C. gracilis x vulgaris (as we should say, C. acuta x Goodenowii). Mr. 
Shoolbred and I did not, however, see C. acuta there, and it does not 
appear to be known from North Scotland, nor does the plant seem to 
be barren. The following short description was made from it when 
fresh : Leaves channelled, rather glaucous ; fruit faintly-veined pale 
