
          Williams College April 13th 1919.


 Dear sir, 


 Your letter was gladly received last week.
 It had long been expected, & I had imagined you were
 too busy to attend to the plants, or else feared you 
 found on inspection that the plant were so badly
 put together & named that you found it too great
 a task to give me any information about them.
 I know indeed there was reason to fear this, as I
 never paid any attention to botany of [much?] [protocol?]
 [consignum?] till two years since, & had not looked
 out but very few plants till last year. And to all this 
 must be added the fact that so many plants called for
 attention at a time.   I am glad to find that only one or 
 two of those you mention were named wrong, which I
 had examined to my satisfaction, with the few books I have. 
 For two or three reasons, I write you as soon as possible. 
 At the same time I express my thanks for your letter upon
 the plants, you may be [opined?] it is the more acceptable, 
 as I have had no letter from the Cor. Sec. [Corresponding Secretary]


 You ask if No. 36 (Brassica napus) is native. It has
 grown from time immemorial in the meadows on Con. [Connecticut]
 River at Northampton, & other places. It was doubtless
 scattered there first by man, but it now sows itself, 
 & the people find it impossible to root it out. Do you 
 wish any more of it? I found at Northampton Ranun
 culus aquatilis, very difft. [different] from R. fluviatilis.


 No. 14, you call Cinna arundunacea. Has it not 3 stamens &
 a divided pistil? It much resembles what we have found &
 I sent as an Andropogon? which has certainly 3 larger anthers. 
 No. 2 is a Poa, [crossed out: but] No. 37 is a fern from Mt. Holyoke. I
 [picked?] it in [?] - but did not know it. I wish much to
 know what it is. Also No. 5, & No. 7 I can not manage.

        