
          Monday [upper right: Oct. 1848]

Dear Doctor

Please look at the specimens in your
Hist. of Heuchera Richardsonii. & see if the
plant of Mead [?] really agrees with it. See
how the stamens are [?] exserted as in Meads.
Compare also the specimens I gave you of Heuchera hispida,
from the Cambridge Garden [crossed out: and] with Meads & see
if they are not exactly the same.

If Richardsonii should be a much smaller plant
& [smoother?]: otherwise it seems to come too close .
Meads is surely H. hispida, Pursh.

No. 27. Monterey. Edwards [?] = [?] hartwegi.-
The others of this set I have labelled in the specimens
sent.

Tuesday_
Now I have done up all the [?],
[crossed out: [?]] & named those you sent.- I will return
them by Carey next week.-

I wrote before about 227. Fendler_ which I
fear you have not got, as it was in a few sets only.
It agrees with your R. canescens, except that
the pod is broadly ovate not obovate, but as it may
be another species of that section, I want some comparison.

I send you a branchlet, and lend you
my fruit. The petals (2/3 inch long) are mostly
finely spotted with purple or pink, and I have as little
doubt that it is R. guttalata. Geyer. except that
Hooker says petals broadly [chordate?], while these are
obovate (rather than ovate) and entire.

Please send me word, if it is same as your plant,
if not, please enable me to make the diagnosis.
        