6o2 the botanical exchange club of the BRITISH ISLES. 
June 19 lo. From the locality given in my ‘ Flora of Berkshire.’ — 
G. Claridge Druce. Yes. — G. Kukenthal. 
[Carex aquatilis x Goode?iowii ; ref. No. 3474]. Plentiful in a 
bog on the east side of Ben More, v.-c. 88 Mid Perth, at nearly 3,000 
feet, July 16, 1910. — Edward S. Marshall. Might I ask by what 
characters the presence of C. aquatilis is evidenced in these speci- 
mens ? — G. Claridge Druce. C. rigida x aquatilis potius quam 
Goodenoughii x aquatilis. — G. Kukenthal. Mr. Druce has asked me 
where aquatilis comes in ; and he is certainly right in questioning 
this. In this bog, besides the present plant, only C. aquatilis, 
C. Goodefiowii, and C. inflata were observed. No. 3474 exactly 
matches my No. 2760, from a swamp near the head of the White 
Water, Clova, Forfarshire, at 2,300 feet (July 1904), which Herr 
Kiikenthal confirmed as C. Goodenowii x rigida, “ tending more 
towards C. Goode/wjvii.^' I have no doubt whatever that C. 
Goodenowii is the female and tlie predominant parent ; I too hastily 
assumed that it must be the offspring of the two allied species with 
which it occurs. — Edward S. Marshall. 
Carex toitientosa, L. Marston Measey, N. Wilts. June 1910. 
Noticed by Mrs. Davey and myself scattered over a considerable 
area of a meadow in its classical locality where it was discovered by 
Mr. Teesdale in 1799 (‘ Trans. Linn. Soc.’ v. p. 369), but where it has 
been since said to be extinct. It is evidently somewhat uncertain 
in its appearance ; as, in a field near Fairford, Gloucester E., where 
some few years ago it was very plentiful, I now can find no trace 
of it. — G. Claridge Druce. Yes. — G. Kukenthal. 
Carex (Ederi, Retz., var. oedocarpa, and (C. flava, minor, 
Towns.). Corriegills, Arran, v.-c. 100, July 1910. — V. S. Travis. 
C. (Ederi, Retz., forma oedocarpa, Anderss. — G. Kukenthal. I 
am not fully convinced that this plant is more than a state of C. 
flava. It may be that the continental form is not quite the same 
as the British. There is no reason why such varieties or states 
as this should not be endemic. There is a scientific interest in 
closely studying, from the standpoint of variation and evolution, forms 
of this nature. — C. E. Moss. Yes, but I think this variety is nearer 
flava than Ederi, although Kiikenthal puts it under the latter. This 
form and C. lepidoca 7 pa are by far the commoner segregates of 
C. flava in Britain. But I think a large series of specimens will 
show that flava, lepidocaipa and o’doeatpa are not so distinct as some 
authors would lead us to believe. True C. Qideri, although varying 
much in size, is usually easily distinguished ; and I prefer to keep 
it as a distinct species. — G. Claridge Druce. Yes; a dwarf state 
of the variety. I dissent from Dr. Moss’s and Mr. Druce’s sug- 
gestions, as the result of many years’ experience. Typeyfaurt is 
