
          Eight or nine years ago I sent you what
I asked you about as C. digitalis. I found first
in Pittsfield, it was so dift. from the commonly
so called C. oligocarpus, that I thought it might
be the plant. It has larger & longer leaves than
the other, often glaucous like C. anaceps, & wide
leaved like it, but not so wide as some. Dr.
Gray once asked if it might be that plant.
It seems to me more like C. digitalis than
the other, & yet perhaps both are too near.

But I can not think you are right in
respect to C. Hitchcocksiana, altogether
longer, stiffer, ercect, & difft. [more?] [?] to
the fruit, & no more like Schk's fig.
of C. oligocarpa, than like C. lupulina.
I suspect the plant you call C. oligocarpa,
is not the true. I have told you,
that I saw one in your collection from
Penn. or Kentucky, like Schk.'s figure.
I will overhaul them, soon the weather
will permit.

Some other things, I can not see as you
do. Sartwell & I overhauled all these last
year, & he saw as I do, & I can not see,
how you come to other conclusions. It
does seem to me, that if you saw them
growing you would think not differently.

In your State Cat., you give C. physocarpa Boott,
as what he does not. Is he
wrong? I do not think he is infallible. 
        