REPORT FOR I910. 
601 
Wiry, creeping rootstock distinguish it at a glance. “Aliquando 
Homerus.” It rooted extensively, and was very 
Cl cult to dig up. Gathered too late in the season, of course. 
carefully compared it, fresh, with Mr. Shoolbred’s herbarium- 
specimens. Can a plant of C. leporina collected by mistake have 
been sent to Herr Kiikenthal ? — Edward S. Marshall. 
Carex dtvisa, L., var. ? In trenches. New Romney, Kent, in 
great abundance,. May 1910. Matches some British so-called 
chaetophylla. Is C. divisa, forma (Schkuhr) teste Kiikenthal. 
G. Claridge Druce. Just matches the Seaford plant sent out 
by Mr. H. S. Thompson as C. chaetophylla, Steudel = C. divisa, 
yar. chaetophylla, Daveau. ^ Rivu laris' would be an extremely 
inappropriate name for any plant found in this Kentish station. — 
Edward S. Marshall. 
Carex Pairaei, Schultz, [ref. No. 2924]. Loddon Bridge, 
Berks. Passed as correct by the Pfarrer Kiikenthal. — G. Claridge 
Druce. C. echinata, Murr. (= C. Pairaei). — G. Kukenthal. 
Agrees with F. Schultz’s own specimens, of which there are excel- 
lent examples in the Br. Mus. Herb. — A. B. Jackson. As I pointed 
out (‘ Journ. Bot.’ 1907, p. 364), the identification of C. Pairaei, F. 
Schultz, with C. muricata, L., is based not only upon the evidence 
of the Linnean herbarium-specimen, but also upon the short de- 
scription in ‘ Species Plantarium,’ which mentions the spreading fruit, 
an essential point of difference from C. contigua, Hoppe, which is 
the inuricata of British authors, Koch, and others. The combined 
force of these facts has, I believe, been underestimated by Messrs. 
Rendle and Britten, as well as by Mr. Druce. A more valid 
objection to the use of the Linnean name at all, because of the 
previously existing confusion, is fairly tenable ; but I do not think 
that it need be dropped, as there is no real ambiguity in the original 
authority’s specimen and description. The Berkshire specimen 
which I have received through the Club is rather poor and unde- 
veloped ; but the best-grown spike agrees very closely, though it is 
less mature, with the shorter ones of my C. Pairaei (ref. No. 2550) 
from Pyle, v. c. 41 Glamorgan. I see nothing on which to separate 
it varietally. C. contigua varies much in habit and in the size of the 
fruit, which is sometimes nearly as large as in C. vulpina, and in 
the case of one of my own gatherings misled so very careful a critic 
as Mr. Beeby. — Edward S. Marshall. In my opinion the specific 
character which separates C. Pairaei from C. muricata, L. {contigua, 
Hoppe) is the size and shape of the fruit ; but I will take another 
opportunity of discussing Carex muricata, L. — G. Claridge 
Druce. 
Carex elongata, L. [ref. No. 2921]. Near Hurst, Berks, 
