
          Carex trichocarpa - the one you think C. lacustris, was a young one
of the former; but I should not have thought it the same, had I not col
lected [crossed out: them?] [added: the ripe one] together with it, in curcumstances that I could not mistake, as
I think &, I am troubled to find [?] on the young fruit. The part
is of little [consequence?] indeed.

C. [poniculata?] troubles me but I concluded it must be Muh's plant.
No. 2. Can this be a var. of C. conoidia? Does it grow about you? If not,
I must doubt till I see it again growing. The fruit, if I recollect, is not more
so concial as in C. conoidia indeed, it is nearly globular as it grows - it is
in difft. soil but may be the same.

C. cepholaphora, I shall examine again tho' I can not doubt you.
No. 5 - Do get out this thing. It is not in Muh. for it differs from his 
[within a curved line in the left margin: # [assigned?] to him] C. [cupulinia?] & [polliculota?] greatly as I think.
Do you call C. disperma, C. tenella? or so you doubt yet? Surely, it is
not in Muh. unless var. differs more than species.

"C. [coinita?] is C. miliacea". Do send it back to me - for I can not conceive
what it is - all my C. [evinita?] have the upper spike stam. [below?]
Let me have a miliacea without fail.

C. digitalis is C. flexuosa I had once called it so - but I found some
thing which I thought incompatible but I am glad it is ascertained.

C. anceps, I saw was quoted by Muh. for his C. plantaginea but I
supposed that they were synonyms, & that Eaton's was the name
of some other botanist, for he [gives?] both as distinct species.
Is not this the fact? In the New Encyclop., both are given as distinct
species.

No. 7. Its fruit resembles C. [pellita?] some indeed - but its leaves are
immensly difft. Do you find it about you? As it grows, it much
more resembles C. tentaculata than C. [pellita?]. Its leaves are, I pre_
sume 3/8ths. inch wide in the middle - which those of C. [pellita?] are
narrow & rolled or round. It grows in difft. situations too - always be
side brooks, in gravel or rocky plains; - the other in muddy, marshy
ground. Has Schkuchr's figs. such diff. in the leaves.

No. 8. "C. oligocarpa!!!!!!" Is it possible? In my memorandum I said
it agreed much with this - but found something to exclude it as I
thought. Its locality is on low, wettish meadow land, - in the midst
of the Carices & grasses this is not where Muh. says.

No. 13. "C. bullata?" was not from Cooley? I had none from him till
long after I wrote you &, I can not find what I sent you with this
* No. [23?] Eaton's C. bullota, the same as Schkuhr's, & syn. with his
vesicaria? If not - perhaps I have it.

* (This is in Cooleys hand writing - perhaps I have put it among Dewey's plants by mistake) Torrey
That new little sp. I will look after - perhaps I can not find it, as I
did not pick it - but i have more of it for you, if you want.

I have made these remarks, [firmly/freely?] but friendly - for my information if
you can give me any - &, to have you look again at one or two. You
did not speak of Nos. 1, 3, 9, 10, 11, & 12.

Dr. Colley sent me C. [curta?] - if true, it grows here, but I did
not find it. I have before sent you C. tentaculota, & hysterici
na, & multiflora, & pedunculata & polytrichoides & [?] - are
they right in Schkuhr?

[right margin]
Since I finished this letter I have learned that the said
box is at Albany - & likely to be there. But I mean
it shall start yet - tomorrow I send again about it.

What is this moss?
        