468 Hope Street, 
Providence, H.I. 
June 17, 1910 
My dear Mrs. Dunham 
I think you are correct when you say you 
sent me two interesting Polytricha. I should say your 807 was 
nearer ?. Smithiae than ?. Ohioense , though it seems to he an 
intergrading form. In general appearance and in most of its 
characters it is very close to the description of the former, 
hut it differs in not having the closely appressed dry leaves 
and having 38 or 40 lamellae instead of about 32, as described 
in the Bryologist 6:41, nor do^ your specimens show the slender 
stems figured in plate viii, fig. 10, I am not sure but the last 
mentioned feature might develop later in the season. Specimens 
of Smithiae collected by Grout and distributed by Hoifinger do 
not tally with the description in some features hardly less 
important than those cited above. 
Y/hy don't you send some of the plants to Dr. Grout and ask him 
his opinion? I should be glad to know what he thinks. 
Your 806 is probably labeled correctly, though this variety 
has caused me much trouble, and is still causing some. I have 
obtained material from various European authorities and there 
appears to be a discouraging difference of opinion in regard to 
what it really is. My last move is to have Dr. Far low look up 
the original Miehaux material in Paris. He is there now. 
Perhaps he will be able to throw so o light on the identity 
when he returns, as he expects to within a few weeks. 
My regards to both Mr. Dunham and yourself. 
Very truly, 
