REPORT FOR 1892. 
389 
Ross, Aug., 1889. Some of the specimens closely approach the 
plant from Corrie Ceander called C. frigida. — G. C. Druce. “A form 
of binervis.^'' — Dr. Lange. 
Carex fulva, Good. Cothill, Berks, July, 1891. This I take to 
be a hybrid of C. Hornschuchiana with C. flava, but nearer the former 
species. C. xanthocarpa appears to me nearer the latter. In the 
‘ Students’ Flora ’ I see this latter is said to be a hybrid with C. distans, 
but I have found it in localities where C. distans is apparently 
absent. — G. C. Druce. C. xanthocarpa^ Deseg., Glen Spean, 
Westerness, Aug., 1891. — G. C. Druce. 
C. Hornshuchiana^ Hoppe. Drinmore, Co. Westmeath, 17th 
June, 1892. — H. C. Levinge. The same form from Fairford, 
Gloster, E., June, 1892. — G. C. Druce. “About what is called on 
the continent, but considerable differences are shown in specimens 
gathered by various collectors in Europe. I have not seen a specimen 
named by Hoppe.” — Arthur Bennett. 
C. . Sea coast north of Southport, 14th Aug., 1892. — 
J. A. Wheldon. “Is C. extensa, Good., with the slenderness of 
var. te 7 iuifolia, DC. ; but the spike disposed as in the ordinary form of 
the plant.” — Arthur Bennett. 
C. piava, L., var. lepidocarpa^ Tausch. ? By Ardblair Loch, E. 
Perth, 19th July, 1892. “It appears to fairly fit withTausch’s description. 
Certainly it is not what we regard as type, nor yet minor, Towns.” — 
E. S. Marshall. Mr. Arthur Bennett thinks it comes nearest to the 
American var. virens. “ I should call Mr. Marshall’s Ardblair Loch 
Carex “narrow-leaved flavaP the perigynia and bracts (the most 
important characters, I suppose) being quite those of the type. I 
have .not, however, seen authentic lepidocarpa, but rely on the paper 
in ‘Journal of Bot.,’ 1889, 331, &c. No doubt the Ardblair plants 
are greenish, their leaves rather narrow, and their staminate spike 
long-peduncled ; but, to some considerable extent, the colour depends 
on the age, and, if the character ‘ sessile or nearly sessile staminate 
spike ’ is pressed, the question may arise, ‘ Have we typical flava in 
England ? I have in my Herb, six sheets in all labelled flava simply 
(all from the north), and none of them differ materially in this respect, 
or in the perigynia or bracts at all, from Mr. Marshall’s specimens.” — 
W, Moyle Rogers. 
C. flava, var. lepidocarpa, Tausch. In the ‘Report’ for 1891, 
the Editor remarks that my specimens of this plant from Charnwood 
Forest “cannot be placed to Tausch’s plant,” and that he does “not 
know where to place it at present.” Certainly the fruit does not 
quite correspond with any of the three figures in ‘ English Botany.’ 
In shape and ribbing it resembles CEderi, but the beak is very much 
longer and more deflexed. It is smaller than that of flava. Speci- 
mens from the same locality have been named lepidocarpa both by 
the late H. C. Watson, and by Mr. T. R. Archer-Briggs. I send a 
few more from the same spot, Charnwood Forest, September, 1892. 
— F. T. Mott. “ I think not ; stem not scabrous above. A curious 
plant.” — E. S. Marshall. As the Editor of the 1891 ‘Report’ says 
these are not C. lepidocarpa, Tausch, and are certainly not C. 
