
          Wms. College Aug. 9. 1824

My Dear Sir, I have at length recd. 4 Nos. of the
Annals of the Lyceum, & got hold of  [Schw?]. Analyt.
Table. And I am much surprised to one thing in
it. It is what he calls C. ovalis, Ph. & C. scoparia
Muh. Now Muh. says that his C. scoparia
is Schk. fig. 175, & Ph. says his C. scoparia is the
same fig. This makes the table absurd enough so
far. And then Ph. refers to Schk. fig. 8, as his
C. ovalis, & that you see in Schk. is the C. ovalis
of Goodman. And to make it worse, Ph. says the
fruit of C. ovalis is ovate, & Muh. says the fruit
of C. scoparia is lanceolate. Truely this is terrible,
besides throwing so much absurdity over
C. scoparia, a species so readily determined by
Schk etc. & so well known by yourself & others.
If any thing is wrong, this table is most
clearly in this case. And then his alteration
of Muh.'s C.straminea into C. scoparia,
making every thing vary from Schk., that
standard, at least in his figures, is truely bad.
for our [Caricography?]. His division too
of C. straminea of Schk., tho' it may be
correct possibly, is at least much to be
doubted. I shall look at this, if health &
opportunity permit at another day. If you
are to publish Schw. descriptions, I really hope you will
not let all the above pass.
        