|
Correspondence of Charles Peck and G. W. Clinton February 25, 2011 |
|
The
Correspondence of Charles
Peck (1833-1917) and George
William Clinton (1807 1885) 1871 Vol. 7 (134) [E 97] My Dear Sir, The specimen inclosed in yours of the 14th
seems to me to be the buds of the plant, emerging just above the scar of the
old leaf. Your point in relation to "striaepes"
is well taken. To suppose a stem to be made up of stiae
alone is absurd. I therefore enclose a new label which I think expresses the
idea intended a little better. In reference to "ryssoleum"
I have looked over Tuckerman's letters and find he wrote it plainly with a
"y". I do not find it in print and it is possible he like other
people may make mistakes sometimes Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Jan. 18 Vol. 7 (135) [E 96] My Dear Sir, Seeing numbers on Mr. Hankenson's
specimens I jumped to the conclusion that you wished me to send names to him,
which I have done. I did not think to mention the fact to you when here. No.
29 contains a little Bryum argenteum and more of a
sterile moss which I do not satisfactorily recognise.
The fungus (18) also is doubtful. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Jan. 19 Vol. 7 (137) [E 94] My Dear Sir, No. 1 Stereum albobadium
Schw. 2 I am disposed to think this a small sterile form of Riccia crystallina L., at least
it comes nearer that than anything I find described, but nothing is said in
the description of that species of the abundant radiculose cells of the under
surface. If fertile specimens could be obtained they might warrant making a
new species, but with these along I preper to hold
to the above opinion. 3 As he has it, R. lutescens Schw. 4 Polyporus abietinus
Fr. I inclose Dr. Curtis's letter to me in
answer to an inquiry I made of him at the request of Prof. Hall in relation
to the extent and price of his Herbarium. Prof. Hall wishes you to see it,
and I therefore send it. Dr. C. evidently puts a higher estimate on his
Herbarium than on his duplicates. I have written to the editor of the Naturalist in reference to the
publication of the new species of fungi. They decline to publish on the
ground that they must make the Naturalist popular and they do not want to
introduce technical terms. They offer to publish in the Proceedings of the
Essex Inst. but I see nothing to be gained by that unless it be a little
time, for the circulation of their Proceedings is scarcely more extended
probably than that of the Regents Report. I would sooner have them published
in the Proceedings of the Albany Inst. than the Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received Jan. 22 [Note the problem
with absence of professional journals here] Vol. 7 (146) [E 85] My Dear Sir, The editors of the American Journals also decline to publish the
descriptions of fungi giving as reasons that their pages are already filled
for some months ahead and that they have reason to believe that they will
have an abundance of articles more interesting than mere "dry
descriptions". The first reason to my mind is satisfactory and
sufficient, but I could wish they had omitted the second, for though the
description of a new species of toadstoo may be dry
to them, it certainly would not be to me nor to any one else interested in
this branch of Botany and it does not look well for a paper professedly
devoted, among other things, to the interests of Botany to exclude all
descriptions of new species of plants on the ground of dryness, unless it is
for the interest of the science that no more descriptions should be
published. They suggest that I try the Acad. Nat. Sci. of Do you think it worthwhile to do so? I fear nothing would be gained
by it. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Feb. 5 & answered 6th Vol. 7 (147) [E 84] My Dear Sir, I am not at all fearfull of losing
priority of name for the new species of fungi even if they await the regular
issue of the Cab. Rep. I shall hope that they will be issued in the future
with less delay. It is my purpose to put a few illustrations in the next
(24th) with Chrome lithograph as an experiment. If satisfactory it will save
some delay in coloring by hand. I have for some time been cherishing the idea of a work on the Fungi
of New York and have been slowly accumulating knowledge and materials. I had
however been cherishing the idea of an elementary Manual first without
knowing exactly how it was to be published. I certainly shall hope in time to
accomplish what you suggest. Since you were here I have been mounting specimens of last seasons
collecting and were it not for the preparation of some lectures I should soon
be ready to attack your pile of specimens, many of which I have never
reported. I do not know how I ever came to write "Ae.
Daphnoideum" for certainly I know of no such
species. Ae. hydnoideum
B. & C. is the species that inhabits leaves of Dirca.
I do not find however that they have ever published a description of it, it
being one of their miserable Cabinet names so far as I know. Your Helvella is H. crispa
Fr. It came to me so badly broken that I must give you another in place of
it. I think you did send me Cordiceps militaris Ehrh. but I can not just now put my hand on it. I have never
found it except on some dead insect or rather pupa. I am glad you sent that Carex to Prof.
Gray and hope he will give us his views of it. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Feb. 8 Vol. 7 (149) [E 82] My Dear Sir, Yours of Feb. 6 & 7 are received. I insert the subgenera of the Agarici in your list xA. (Mycena) iocephalus B. & C. xA. (Omphalia) Pleurotus striatulus Pers. xA. (Psilocybe) spadiceus Schaeff. A. (Galera)
Sphagnorum Pers. xA. (Lepiota) aspratus Berk. Probably I shall not be able to make much out of those Switzerland
Fungi, especially if they are mostly fleshy species, still I generally get a
few new ideas in looking over a set of specimens and I make it a rule never
to reject any opportunity of acquiring any new ideas concerning these plants.
If you are so disposed you may send them on. I think the Xylaria to be X. Hypoxylon var. pedata Fr. His description is thus: " [gama]
pedata, glabra, nigra, clavula subdiscreta pedato-incisa.
Fries V. A. H. [& C.?] Stipes clavulam superat. Cum vulgari". Mr. Gerard's name is W. R. Gerard. He is still in I have recently ordered Mr. M. C. Cooke's "Handbook of British
Fungi" a new work of which Part I is just out. He purposes in it to give
descriptions of all British fungi now known, and illustrations of all the
principal genera. I think it may be a good thing and when I get my Part I if
it sustains my expectations and is worth the money (whole cost including both
parts and postage $5.75) I will let you know. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Feb. 9 Vol. 7 (158) [E 72] My Dear Sir, Durkee & Jenkins, whose card I inclose, have
a copy of Torreys Flora of N.Y., colored plates, which they will sell
separately for $20, $10 a Vol. Dr. Stevens has a part set, 6 Vols. including the Botany which he
will sell for $36. Only secondhand copies can be had, but I am told that
sometimes they may be had at a lower rate than D. & J. ask. These are the
only ones I now know of for sale. I am to day shut up in the house with a very badly inflamed eye. As
soon as I get out again I will inquire concerning Gray's Bot. with mosses,
look up some fruiting Riccia for you, &c. I do
not see now how I can do anything with the Your specimens of fungi mentioned are put away with the rest in a
pile just as they were sent to me and I can not probably find them
without overhauling many parcels; as soon as I can get at it I will endeavor
to find them or others in place of them for you. The Rhizomorpha
subcorticulis is the one you labeled "Roots I
suppose" or something to that effect. It grows under bark of old stumps
and logs and looks like black anastomozing roots.
It is thought by some to be only a state of some Hypoxylon. Erineum
roseum is the rosy somewhat lineated Erineum that occupies the upper surface of birch leaves. Sphaeria longissima grows on
dead stems of Chenopodium forming long somewhat
rectangular patches. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Feb. 15 Vol. 7 (159) [E 71] My Dear Sir, It seems Prof. Gray "swears by Olney" in reference to the Carex and Olney simply repeats with emphasis the decision
he gave me last summer. It is now my turn to say that I do not think the carex is C. capillaris; at
least the C. capillaris described in our botanies.
I base my opinion chiefly upon the fact that the perigynia
are 2-nerved whereas in our descriptions of C. capillaris
it is said they are nerveless, - and this according to Olney himself is good
for confirming specific characters. Prof. Wood in his Addenda to the Botanist
and Florist emphasises this character, and also
says the leaves are long. In Cowles' Carex they are
not half the length of the culm, and hence,
comparatively speaking, could not be called long. The scale too in Cowles Carex is broadly obovate, not "ovate" as some
of them have it in description. I may or may not deserve the name of
"precise botanist" but the simple admission of an elongated culm as the only point of difference between this Carex and C. capillaris of our
botanies (I have no authenticated specimens and must go by the description)
does not satisfy me. To overlook such discrepancies as I have pointed out I
fear would give me the name of "Loose botanist." The whole thing
reduces itself to this, either our descriptions of C. capillaris
are singularly erroneous or else Mr. Olney's determination is. Which shall we
take? Out of deference to superior authority and judgement
I will do as you say, either make it C. capillaris
var. or leave it C. Cowlesii. Names do not alter
the nature of things. I hope Mr. Cowles will find us an abundance of
specimens in good condition and such as may remove the doubts from my mind at
least. I forgot in my last to say that I do not know to whom
we may look for a work on our Algae. Mr. Wood of Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton P. S. The package of fungi is at hand but owing to the condition of
my eye I have not yet looked at them. C. H. P. Received Feb. 16 Vol. 7 (165) [E 63] My Dear Sir, The package is received - also the specimen of Carex
capillaris. My eye is still much inflamed and the doctor forbids me using the
well one, but a single glance at the Carex banishes
all doubts. If this be C. capillaris then Cowles's
plant can be nothing more than a form of it; but I would like to know why in
the name of common sense, both Gray and Wood pronounce the perigynia nerveless! The nerves in this are if anything
more distinct than in Cowles'. I have but one good eye but with that alone they are plainly
perceptible. Besides, the very marked character of the upper fertile spike
surpassing the sterile one is overlooked in the descriptions and the scales
are misrepresented. If all descriptions belied the species as much as those
of C. capillaris seem to do from what I now see, I
fear I should be guilty of making many synonyms. I thank you very much for
sending me this specimen so authoritatively labeled. Olney is a bully boy,
and no wonder Gray referred the Carex to him. I
hope next time Prof. Gray writes a description of C. capillaris
or its section he will have more nerve about him than to write nerveless and
thus mislead poor unfortunates who depend on his descriptions for much of their
knowledge. My physician would scold me if he knew I was writing and so must
stop. I shall not be able to examine the specimens till my eye gets better.
Fortunately it is not the one I use with the microscope that is affected. If
it were I should be half crazy. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Feb. 20 Vol. 7 (171) [E 56 and E 57 - two sheets] My Dear Sir, My eye is much better and I trust I shall soon be over this bad
place. I have ventured to use it a little to day, but I feel that I must
exercise a little care at first. The physician attributes the trouble to
taking cold which settled in that eye - it having been a defective one for a
long time. The moss is as you suppose - Leptodon trichomitrium - a beautiful species according to my
notion. Prof. Wood wrote to me some time ago that he purposed issuing a new
edition of his "Botanist and Florist", & to add thereto the
Grasses, Sedges and Mosses. He asked me for aid in specimens of mosses which
I have already given him. You are right in supposing my commercial ability to
be nothing but I scarcely know what to say about your suggestion of a joint
authorship. I am perfectly willing to aid him all I can in any way that does
not interfere with my duties in my present position. I am paid for my
services there and do not feel like putting myself under obligations to do
work which might interfere with those duties. I have to day made inquiry concering the
edition of Gray's Manual with the Mosses. I do not find it on hand here, but
they say the price is $3.75. I presume it can be had of the publishers for
that, or of the Naturalist Agency which I see advertises it at that price Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received March 2, answered 3d Vol. 7 (177) [E 50] My Dear Sir, I am at work again, though out of respect to my eye I do not venture
to use the microscope any yet. I have received a very unexpected
communication from Prof. Wood in relation to the publication of his
Manuscript on the mosses. I inclose his letter to
you that you may give your opinion as to the propriety of its publication in
the manner he proposes. I have taken a look at your herbarium specimens of Carex capillaris and they
confirm me in the idea that Mr. Olney is right in calling Cowles plant a large
form of that species. It seems to be quite variable in its appearance,
judging from your specimens. But I should scarcely think the one from
Christiana, could be the same species as the rest. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received March 9 Vol. 7 (184) [E 43] My Dear Sir, The little Aecidium is a pretty thing, but I do not find any
description that meets it. It is possibly an undescribed species. I suspect
there is really dimorphism in fungi and that Aecidium is one state of Puccinia, Uromyces etc. It
would be well for us when finding any Aecidium in abundance, to mark the
locality and later in the season visit it again and examine the same plants
for these secondary or later forms. For example I have found Aecidium aroidatum on leaves of Arisaema
triphyllum. Later in the season I find on those
same plants an abundance of Uredo (Trichobasis) Ari-Virginici Schw. Oat leaves bearing Uredo rubigo I find are at the same time or a little later
infected with Puccinia coronata
and leaves of the morning glory (Calystegia sepium) affected with Trichobasis
Polygonorum are in autumn found to bear Puccinia Convolvuli B. & C.If
these later forms should be found to be derived from the earlier ones it
would reduce our number of species greatly but the truth ought to be known
and it may prove of great practical value to us in fighting our fungoid pests. At any rate the point is worth a little
extra labor in investigating it. Mr. Mohr would do well to examine the Trifolium where he found the Aecidium, in a few weeks, to
see if it bears any other fungus. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received March 16 Vol. 7 (185) [E 42] My Dear Sir, In order to be on the safe side, I hestitate
to use my microscope yet, though my eye does not trouble me any now. I wish
to give it a fair chance and so only send the names of such of your specimens
as I readily recognize with the naked eye. March 16 x9 Polyporus versicolor
Fr. x10
Stereum purpureum Pers. March 17 x4 Old stems of Stemonitis, either fusca or ferruginea x5
Dothidea crystallophora
B. & C. yet only a manuscript name. x6
Rhizomorpha subcorticalis
Pers. This is thought by some to be a state of some Hypoxylon. x8 Jungermannia curvifolia
(small red) x & Jungermannia
Schraderi (larger red) & Some Hypnum x18
Tremella mesenterica
Retz. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received March 19 Vol. 7 (187) [E 40] My Dear Sir, I have ventured to look at your specimens of Mar. 17 second lot,
with the following results only. x25
Massaria vomitoria B.
& C. A manuscript name I suppose x26
Dacrymyces stillatus Nees. 31 Polyporus abietinus
Fr. (old) 32 Discosia Artocreas
Fr. x33
Rhizomorpha subcorticalis
Pers. x43 Cantharellus crispus
Fr. (old) of March 20 x1
I suspect is Septoria Phlyctaenoides
B. & C. (Ms. name) but there are no spores. x2
Tubercularia vulgaris Tode. This is now thought by some to be a form of Nectria cinnabarina 5 Sphaeria complanata
Fr. x8
Cladosporium herbarium Lk.
(the green.) I make nothing of the rest. If I wrote in my last as I suspect I did, Dothidea
Maclurae, please substitute for "Maclurae" "crystallophora"
B. & C. Sphaeopsis Maclurae
grows on the Osage Orange also and I may have confused the specific name. I
have no complete specimens of the Rubus but send
some Elatine. I expect to "spout" on
botany to night. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received March 28, 29th - wrote for No. 31 Vol. 7 (190) [E 36] My Dear Sir, Of Mar. 29 A. The larger tubercles are Hypoxylon argillaceum Fr. The small black ones are some Valsa
probably V. Americana B. & C. but I am not certain, having no description
of that species. B seems to be Biatora rubella - a lichen May joy and success attend your contemplated trip to Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Ap. 2 Vol. 7 (191) [E 35] My Dear Sir, Of the specimens of Mar. 30th I can only make x4 & x8 to be Tubercularia vulgaris and x2
& x3 Phoma melaleucum
B. & C. This last one is determined from comparison with specimens
received from Dr. Curtis and is, I suppose, only a Cabinet or Manuscript
name. Mar. 31 x1
Sclerotium Orobanches Schw. x2
Biatora viridescens Fr.
(A lichen). x3
Diatrype Cercidicola B.
& C. according to Curtis' specimens. Probably another Cabinet name. Did
you find it on the Cercis? x4 Diachaena faginea
Fr. (Poor) x6 Biatora rubella (A lichen) x8
Hysterium pulicare Fr.
Probably - No spores. The others are not recognised. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck P. S. Apr. 3d x1 Dichaena faginea x2 Valsa x3
Hypoxylon argillaceum so
far as can be seen in the sterile state. I have never seen it fertile. x4
Hypoxylon fragiforme. Old
and coated with a blue mold which appears to be a Rhinotrichum.
What species is a question. x5 = 4 C. H. P. Received Ap. 5 Vol. 7 (192) [E 34] My Dear Sir, The fungus of Apr. 6th marked A (on cow dung) is Sphaeria
leucoplaca B. & R. I do not know if they have
ever published a description of it - probably it is only a cabinet name, but
one made public through Ravenel's Carolini Fungi Exsicc. You may send on those Swiss fungi from Lesqx.
if you choose and I will do as well with them as I
can. I have looked through the Schaerer Coll. which
came while I was laid up with a sore eye. I have been able to determine a few
of them. These and your specimens of Carex capillaris are ready for you whenever you shall direct me
what to do with them. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton P. S. Of Apr. 10th specimens I only recognize No. 5 which is Sphaeria Verbascicola Schw. (sterile) Received Ap. 12 Vol. 7 (196) [E 30] My Dear Sir, Yours of Apr. 20th contains (1) Pannaria lanuginosa Ach. - a lichen, and
(2) Sphaeria coniformis
Fr. - a fungus. A letter a fortnight ago contained two specimens which I
could not determine and therefore it remained unanswered. The spring does
open finely. I have rushed out a couple times and obtained a few good things.
Do you remember that about a year ago you brought here a fungus growing on horn. I have been looking at it again and think it is Onygena equina Pers. In the
recent fire which destroyed the printing establishment of Weed Parsons &
Co. the 23d Cab. Report, which was well under way, was destroyed. This will
delay its issue some time longer - a thing which I regret, but I trust it
will be good when it does come. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Ap. 23 Vol. 7 (201) [E 25] My Dear Sir, The "very minute black dots" on leaves of Apr 30 appear to
be some Sphaeria but I do not find any
fructification hence am unable to determine them. On
the beech leaves is some Discasia Artocreas and some old Erineum fagineum. I received the "Swiss Fungi" and have detmined
them as far as I could. Shall I return them by mail? What beautiful spring
weather. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received May 4 Vol. 7 (209) [E 15] My Dear Sir, Your No 1 on leaves of Allium is Septoria viride-tingens Curtis. The other things, on bark, I am unable to determine. Two days ago I found a small quantity of Aecidium Calthae Grev. - the first time, so far as I know, that it has been found
in this country. I have for some time noticed that the tumors which produce the
"black knot" (Sphaeria morbosa) at first produce a cropf
of Cladosporium, a dark green mold. The other day I
received a little pamphlet from M. C. Cooke, on "Polymorphic Fungi"
in which it is stated that some botanists regard the very common Cladosporium herbarum as the
early stage of Sphaeria herbarum.
Here appears to be dimorphism in an unexpected quarter. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received May 19 Vol. 7 (212) [E 12] My Dear Sir, The moss from Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton P. S. I yesterday found a new species of Ustilago
on leaves of Erythronium Americanum C. H. P. Received May 24 Vol. 7 (213) [E 11] My Dear Sir, No. 1, May 22d, is Puccinia Cryptotaenia Rk. - an
unfortunate name as it is not confined to Cryptotaenis
leaves. It may be another case of dimorphism as I see the remains of Aecidium
Claytoniatum [sic] Schw.
in your specimen I find this Puccinia also follows the
Aecidium in the Helderberg locality where I first
found Ae. Claytoniatum. No. 2 I make nothing of. No. 3 is a Perenospora
near P. arborescens Berk.
but I am not sure if it is that species. These
moulds are difficult things for me to handle. I shall remember Rubus neglectus
for you. Intend to go to Sandlake next week and I
will then look after flowering specimens. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton P. S. Dr. Howe brings me more fungi than I can determine. How I wish
I knew all these things - a rash wish perhaps for then I should not have the
pleasure of a first acquaintance with them - but it grieves me not to be able
to communicate information when it is sought. C. H. P. [On margin - back] I have written to Mr. Cowles for more of that
tall Carex capillaris. [On margin - front] I send to day by Express the fungi etc. I have
named such as I could and taken a part of such as seemed desirable to me and
thank you for them. I have not been able to determine the Hepaticae and
retain them for further examination. Received May 30 [Just what did
stay at Vol. 7 (218) [E 6] My Dear Sir, The grasses are Festuca tenella Willd, Poa pratensis L. and one of the
many forms of Panicum dichotomum
L. - the early state. No 1 June 14 I believe to be Aecidium elatinum A. & C. but the leaf is not altered as is
said to be the case in the attacks of that species. I have no specimen with
which to compare it but so far as I can judge by the figure and description
if agrees well except in this mentioned exception. Perhaps this is due to the
slightness of the attack as the fungus is figured as occupying the whole
under surface of the leaf. No. 2 is Ceratodon purpureus. I obtained a few specimens of Rubus neglectus in flower in my trip to Sandlake. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received June 20 Vol. 7 (220) [E 4] My Dear Sir, Thanks for the variety of Equisetum arvense.
I had not seen it before. Of June 20th xNo.1
is what I call Polyporus Boucheanus
Fr. x2
Probably young Roestelia. x3 No fungus - insect rascalities 4 Melanconium bicolor Nees. x5
Aecidium Ranunculacearum DC. Ae.
Ranunculi Schw. I
consider a different species - one occupying the whole under surface of the
leaves of Ranunculus abortivus - not growing in
definite spots. x6
Aecidium Compositarum Mart. x7
Here seems to be a muddling mixture of Cladosporium
and Macrosporium. Species doubtful. I have none of No. 5 except that which you have sent. A few more
specimens are desirable. Also of Ae. Allenii on leaves of Shepherdia
if you should find it. We ought to have a specimen or two of Scirpus Clintonii. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received June 24 Vol. 7 (221) [E 3] My Dear Sir, I make the xx1
Exidia glandulosa xx2 Hypocrea Richardsonii B. & M. xx4
Erineum fagineum xx7
Lenzites sepiaria Fr. x15
Frullania x16
Frullania Eboracensis Lehm. Liverwort. xx18
Stereum rugosum Fr. xx19
Lenzites sepiaria Fr. xx20
Schizophyllum commune Fr. xx25 Irpex Tulipiferae Schw. xx31 Hypocrea Richardsonii B. & M. x23 Hypoxylon fuscum
(old) xx26
Panus stypticus Fr. xA
Cantharellus crispus Fr. B Polyporus
versicolor Fr. D Lenzites sepiaria
Fr. xE
Polyporus cinnabarinus
Fr. xG
Irpex Tulipiferae Schw. (Young) xI
Polyporus versicolor Fr. xJ Frullania Grayana Mort. 3, 24, C, H, & F are undetermined. x30
A lichen - Baeomyces aeruginosus
DC. (= Biatora icmadophila
Fr.) Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton P. S. The specimen form C. H. P. Received June 25 [These are
Fowler’s fungi; see Dec. 12th, 1871 below] Vol. 7 (222) [E 2] My Dear Sir, 1 (a part returned,) I take to be a thin form of Merulius
lacrymans Schum. - Did
the gentleman notice any watery drops on it when fresh? That species is said
to be "fleshy", this is membranaceous,
but this single discrepancy may be due to its habitat. June 23d Cayuga I[sland] 1 Aecidium Geranii DC. 2 No fungus - probably insects work. 3 Uredo Helianthi
Schw. I suspect this is the early stage of Puccinia Helianthi Schw. 4 Aecidium Ranunculacearum. Yes send on
some. The others are dubious. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck P. S. I have found an excellent correspondent in M. C. Cooke, an
ardent devotee of Mycology, a plain practical earnest worker, with whose aid
I hope to put our microscopic species in their proper places, and to get a knowledge of European forms. Received June 27 [Note Peck's
punctuation is always inside the parentheses and quotation marks] Vol. 7 (223) [E 1] My Dear Sir, Many thanks for Scirpus Clintonii, and Aecidium Ranunculacearum.
The Equisetum does not agree well with E. arvense.
It comes nearer E. palustre and if not that species
is quite likely E. littorale as you suspect. I have found the Hydrodictyon in the xA The yellow dots are immature sporangia of the Erysiphoid plant. xB xC I do not recognize the Polyporus,
probably there will be more of it developed from the "little
knobs". Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received June 28 Vol. 8 (2) [H 225] [no heading - 1871] My Dear Sir, Of the specimens of June 27th the only one in good condition is No.
7 = Discosia Artocreas Fr. xNo1 is some young Trichia. x2 is onlny mycelium and not namable x3 is infertile - probably some Hypoxylon x4 Badly mashed and decomposing x5 No fungus x6 Too old, whatever it is x7
Pressed out of shape and discolored so that I do not recognize it. Of June 28th Many thanks for Aecidium Allenii x1
Tremella albida Hud. x3
Boestelia lacerata Jul.
[-sp.?] x4 Boestelia but undeveloped x5
Erysiphe lamprocarpa Lev. x7 Xylaria (too young) 99 Calicium subtile
& some Hysterium 96 Hysterium x10 Polyporus elegans
Fr. x11
Peziza coccinea Jacq. x12
Stemonitis ferruginea Ehrh. 2 Hysterium the
others I do not recognize. M. C. Cooke proposes to revise our species of Hysterium and I await the revision before endeavoring to
identify these. They seem to be in some confusion. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received July 1 Vol. 8 (4) [H 223] My Dear Sir, Of June 29 [in margin in pencil - 2 Unknown x3 It is doubtful if the spots come to anything x4
This is curious. Not knowing just where to place it I send one leaf to Cooke. July 4th 1 Not a fungus x2
Aecidium Panunculacearum DC. x3
Puccinia Umbelliferarum
DC. The leaf appears to be Osmorrhiza x4
Puccinia Violarum Lk. The yellowish dots are Trichobasis
Violarum Berk. but are
only the early state of the Puccinia x5 Polyporus abietinus
Fr. Th
others are "incertae". Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received July 8 Vol. 8 (7) [H 220] My Dear Sir, I return the small Peziza on Equisetum
which I take to be our American form of P. Persoonii
although it does not fully meet the description of the European plant. I have
sent a specimen to Cooke and hope he may be able to clear all doubts - in the
mean time I call it P. Persoonii. "B" June 26 I too hastily named Puccinia
Cryptotaeniae. I think it is not on Cryptotaenia leaf but Osmorrhiza
- at any rate it equals 3 July 4 and is P. Umbelliferarum.
The spores differ from those of P. Cryptotaeniae in
being more regular and not having a little umbo or
protuberance at the apex, also in habit. If you please, save some of No. 4 from June 29th. If Mr. Cooke
should make anything of it I shall be glad of more. I have no hesitation in affirming that this Peziza
(inclosed) is P. coccinea
Jacq. although wanting a stipe while the description calls for one, 1/2-1 in.
long. I do not consider this character of specific value, neither
slight differences or size or color unless supported by something else.
Unfortunately I can not now put my hand on the smaller one (of June 28)
though I remember seeing it at the time and had then no doubt of its being
only a small growth of this species. Perhaps too certain for I was so
confident I did not examine the spores as I should otherwise have done. I will bear your request in mind when writing again to Cooke. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck P. S. Next week I intend to start out on a botanical trip up North. Received July 12 Vol. 8 (17) [H 208] My Dear Sir, I yesterday returned and found your letter and package waiting for
me. July 15 x1
Puccinia Xanthis Schw. x2
& 3 Lecythea epitea
Lev. x5 Helvella crispa
Fr. x6
Irpex cinnamomea Fr. var. x8
Insect galls. x10
Pistillaria Muscicola Fr.
on Climacium Americanum Brid. x12 Phlebia radiata
Fr. x14
Rhytisma Solidaginis Schw. The others I am not prepared to decide upon. x"A"
is a fungus - a Uredo - species uncertain. The works most desirable seem to me to be On Fungi Fries SystemaMucologicum 3 Vols. - Vols. 2
& 3 each in two Parts (and with this work should be his 1st & snd Elenchus.) Fries Epicrisis or Synopsis Hymenomycetes 1 Vol. Cookes Handbook of British Fungi (This is a new work just completed.) On Lichens Acharius Synopsis Methodica Lichenum
1 Vol. Fries Lichenographia Europea
Reformata 1 Vol. and probably Nylander's
work, but this I have not seen. On Algae, Rabenhorsts work has been
recommended to me but I have not yet seen it. Fries and Acharius
are both in Latin - so probably are Nylander and Rabenhorst. Concerning the fungus on Violet leaves which I sent to M. C. Cooke,
he writes "I do not know what to make of it. Is it a Phacidium?" So I am not the only one puzzled by it. I had a terribly wet time in the Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Aug. 12 - Vol. 8 (21) [H 204] My Dear Sir, Of the specimens of Aug. 17th I make out the following thus, x1
Trichobasis Labiatarum
Lev. -2 Eggs of "Golden eye" or more commonly "Lace wing
Fly" - Chrysopa. xe Uromyces Junci (Schw.) = Puccinia Junci Schw. x5
I found this for the first time in my recent trip north, growing on the fruit
of Amelanchier and named it, in my notes, Roestelia aurantiaca, in reference
to the orange colored spores - a character in which it differs from every
other species known to me. x6
Insect work. x7
Cystopus candidus Lev. x8
Boletus strobilaceus Scop. x9
Hydnum coralloides Scop. x12
Orthotrichum strangulatum
Beauv. x14
Lecythea Saliceti Lev. x15 Dr. Curtis formerly named this for me, as Uredo
Leguminosarum Lk. and I
probably have so named it for you before, but when I came to see the
description of that species I could not believe this to be the same. I
therefore, gave it in my last Report as Uredo Aecidioides n. sp. - the sori
after the falling of the spores resembling little Aecidium-like cups. x16
Lycoperdon pyriforme Schaeff. x17
Trichobasis Ari-Virginici
(Schw.) = Uredo Ari-Virginici Schw. x21
Gymnostomum rupestre Schwaegr. If next month should not be excessively dry I purpose collecting a
few toadstools in Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received Aug. 21 Vol. 8 (22) [H 203] My Dear Sir, I should say the specimens of Aug. 20 from x1
Fissidens adiantoides Hedw. x2
Madotheca platyphylla Dumort. x3
Frullania Eboracensis Lehm. x4
Pylaisaea velutina W. P.
Sch. x5
Hypnum cordifolium Hedw. x6 Hypnum plumosum
(with the fruit) Dicranum
interruptum (sterile) x7
Orthotrichum crispulum Hornsch. x10
Rhytisma Ilicis
[?]-Canadensis Schw. x11
Rhytisma Prini Schw. 8, 9 & 12 are not determined Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received Aug. 24 Vol. 8 (25) [H 200] My Dear Sir, My right eye has been and is yet affect just as my left was last
spring. This forbids any use of the microscope at present and I only give you
the names of such as I recognize at sight Aug. 31 x1 Corticium salicinum
Fr. x2
Coniothecium toruloideum
B. & C. x4 Sept. 2 x5
Pileolaria brevipes B.
& C. Sept. 4th x2
Crucibulum vulgare Tul. as given in Cooke's new
work. Formerly Cyathus crucibulum. Sept. 5th I do not recognize either of the two. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Sept. 9 Vol. 8 (36) [H 189] My Dear Sir, I have just returned from a short and not overwhelmingly successful
trip to Cattaraugus Co., Watkins and Montezuma Marshes. I found but few
Agarics, it being too dry and cold for them, but have some other very good
things. My eye is well again and I shall begin gradually to use it. My
trouble seems to me to have been not so much a weakness from over exertion as
a kind of distemper that would be likely to attack good as well as poor eyes.
I hope I shall not be troubled with it again as it has now given both my eyes
a trial. The specimens that have come during my absence so far as I can now
say, are; Sept. 26 x2 Sporocybe Persicae
Fr. 3 Dicranum varium
Hedw. Sept. 28 x1
Trypethelium virens Tuck.
(Lichen) 3 Polyporus elongatus
Berk. x4 Irpex cinnamomeus
Fr. Sept. 30 x1
Microsphaeria Syringae Schw. x2
Erysiphe lamprocarpa Lev. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Oct. 5 Vol. 8 (38) [H 187] My Dear Sir, The missing packets were not lost, but came when my eye was pretty
bad and were laid aside till a more convenient time. Of Sept 7 I would name the following thus- x1 Vermicularia dematium
Fr. x2 Vermicularia dematium
Fr. x3 Not developed; probably Roestelia cornuta x4
Roestelia cornuta Tul. (small) I have found three species of Roestelia on
Amelanchier, viz. R. cornuta
on the leaves, R. lacerata on leaves and fruit and
R. aurantiaca n. sp. on the fruit. I am not sure
what Schweinitz's R. Botryapites
is, but suspect it to be R. cornuta. He has a very
unsatisfactory way of describing all his Coniomycetes.
Specimens received from Dr. Curtis labeled "Roestelia
Botryapites Schw."
are only the spermogonia of R. cornuta
or R. lacerata. x6
Uromyces solida B &
C. x7
Uromyces triquetra Cooke. x10 & 11 Polyporus adustus
Fr. Sept. 8 x1
Rhytisma Asteris Schw. x3
Erysiphe communis Schl. x4
I sent this thing to Cooke some time ago but he has not yet ventured to name
it. x5
& 6 Uncinula adunca
Lev. x10 Polyporus salicinus
Fr. Sept. 10 x6
Phyllactinia guttata Lev.
The one labeled
"Omitted in my last" is Polyporus sulfureus Fr. & is without number. Of the remainder some are not good and some I am not able at present
to identify. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Oct. 13 [At top of front
sheet: "Please send more of No. 2 - Sept. 2nd - Tilia"
"C.H.P." - I think in 43.] Vol. 8 (43) [H 181] My Dear Sir, I name such of your several sendings as I
am able. Oct. 13 x4
Phyllactinia guttata Lev. x12
Is a fine Puccinia but needs further examination
and comparison. x13
& x14 Erysiphe lamprocarpa
Lev. Oct 14 x4
Erysiphe lamprocarpa Lev. x7
Puccinia Myrrhis Schw. probably. I am not quite satisfied that this is
distinct from P. Umbelliferarum. Is a good Puccinia with rough spores.
Nothing is said of this character in P. Prunorum
else I should think it that species. Oct. 15 x3
Uredo Solidaginis Schw. x4
This is like 12 of Oct. 13. I at first thought them Puccinia
Menthae but the pedicels are long, not
"short" as described x10
Puccinia striola Lk. x11
Puccinia Compositarum Schlect. [sp.?] Oct. 16 x4
Lecythea Rub[o]rum Lev. x1
Microsphaeria penicillata
Lev. Oct. 17 1 Lenzites sepiaria
Fr. The one on Tilia leaves I think is a new
species of Uncinula. I wish to send a few of the
doubtful species to M. C. Cooke for his opinion. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received Oct. 23 P.S. I have an Arceuthobium from Sandlake which Engelmann thinks is a new species. It is
certainly new to our State. Will send you specimens as soon as Dr. Engelmann
decides upon the species. [See Vol. 8 No.
38 above for reference to the specimen on Tilia.] Vol. 8 (44) [H 180] My Dear Sir, M. C. Cooke's "Handbook of British Fungi" 2 Vols. is the
most satisfactory thing of the kind that I have seen. It is much more
complete than " I name a part of your specimens Oct. 18 x1
Puccinia graminis Pers. x2 Uncinula (Undescribed I think) Oct. 22 x3
Phyllactinia guttata Lev. x4
Sphaerotheca (Undescribed I think) (Would like a
little more if you have it to spare.) x5
Weissia viridula Brid. x7
Trichobasis Pyrolae Berk. ( = Uredo Pyrolae ...) x9 only mycelium x11
Mnium punctatum Hedw. x12
Glonium stellatum Muhl. x18 Puccinia Lespedezae-violaceae
Schw. but it is a Uromyces
and should be Uromyces Lespedezae-violaceae
(Schw.) x19 Phragmidium obtusum
Lk. = (Aregma obtusatum Fr.) x20
probably Puccinia Menthae
but because of a slight apparent discrepancy in the description I have sent
this to Cooke. Will report when I hear from him. x21 Erineum alnigerum x22 Microsphaeria x22
Microsphaeria
sp.? x23 = 21 & 22 24 Hypoxylon fuscum
Fr. 28 Microsphaeria (Undescribed & think)
(Can you spare another bit?) Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Oct. 28 Vol. 8 (47) [H 177] My Dear Sir, Of Oct. 27 2 Dothidea graminis
Fr. = (Sphaeria graminis
Pers.) 3 & under side of 4 Uncinula. Species
uncertain. Upper side of 4 is probably Sphaeria Ulmi but is without fruit. Oct. 31 x3
Scorias spongiosa Fr.? x4
Polyporus nigropurpurascens
Schw. (Gloeoporus nigropurpurascens (Schw.) in
Curtis Catalogue.) 1 & 2 not determined. I suspect "Erysiphe penicillata Fr." in Ravenel
is meant to be the same species now known as Microsphaeria
penicillata but I have grave doubts concerning the
correctness of its application - at least so far as the specimen on Syringa vulgaris is concerned.
Were I a smoker I would be willing to bet the cigars that that specimen is Microsphaeria Syringae (Schw.) a very different species. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Nov. 6 Vol. 8 (48) [H 176] My Dear Sir, I have looked at the specimens of Nov. 10th with the following
result. x2
Merulius tremellosus Schrad. x3
Hysterium biforme Fr.
probably It is new to us. Can you spare some more? x5 Cantharellus crispus
Fr. x6 Stereum complicatum
Fr. x8 Peziza furfuracea
Fr. x9 Dichaena faginea
Fr. x11
Tubercularia vulgaris Tode. This is said to be a form of Nectria
cinnabarina. x12
Pedicellate variety of 11 apparently. x13 Polyporus cinnabarinus
Fr. x16 Hypoxylon serpens
(Pers.) "1" on Dandelion is a Sphaerotheca
which will be determined hereafter. Nov. 11 3 Tremella meseuterica
Retz. x6
Tremella foliacea Pers. x8 Stereum complicatum
Fr. The one returned is probably Sphaeronema subtile Fr. but I saw no globule and was able to get none
by moistening the specimen. [no ending] Received Nov. 16 Vol. 8 (49) [H 175] My Dear Sir, "Franklin B. Hough, Mr. Paine, in his Catalogue gives its localities quite definitely so
that if it still remains it would not be a very difficult matter to collect
it next season. Mr. P. may have a supply of specimens as I infer from his
remarks that he found it in Jefferson Co. I have not Muller's Synopsis. Probably it could be obtained of or
through Scribner & Co., or Westermann & Co.
Probably the "Stereum frustulosum" on Juniper is an error of mine. At any
rate I do not now remember of ever seeing that species on Juniper, whereas S.
acerinum is common about here on the bark of Juniperus Virginiana. I have
found S. frustulosum on wood of deciduous trees
only. I apprehend there are quite a number of errors in my earlier namings of specimens for you and I have been anxious to
give your specimens a revision - a work which I intended to do last winter
but was obliged to omit because of the demand made on my time in the
preparations of lectures for the Scientific Course here. "Oct. 13" 1 I believe to be Trichia clavata. The other little fellows I make nothing of. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck P. S. The Nectria which Dr. Curtis called
"N. appendiculata n. sp." is described in
Cookes Handbook under the name N. inaurata B. & Br. Vol. 8 (50) [H 174] My Dear Sir, In reporting on the specimens of Nov. 10th I meant to give Nos. 11
& 12 as Tubercularia vulgaris
Tode and 17 as a pedicellate
variety of the same, but it seems I blundered in some way. Is your 17 on bark of Carpinus? It is
often desirable to know the habitat. I have a Nectria
on bark of Carpinus about which I am in doubt. I
have sent a specimen of it to Cooke. If he makes a new species of it, it is
not at all unlikely that your Tubercularia will
turn out to be a condition of this Nectria and
therefore distinct from Tubercularia vulgaris which is a condition of N. cinnabarina.
I can detect no difference in the size and shape of the spores between this
and T. vulgaris. I have the same pedicellate form on the striped maple and at first
thought it a new species but comparing the spores with those of T. vulgaris and finding no difference I concluded it was
only a pedicellate variety produced by the greater
elongation of the filaments of the stroma. However,
if the perfect condition - the Nectria - can be
connected with it, it will settle the matter of its identity. I supose all the Tubercularia and
probably some or all the Fusarium species will yet
be reduced to Conidiophorous conditions of the Nectria. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Nov. 19 Vol. 8 (53) [H 171] My Dear Sir, Of the specimens of Nov. 18 I do not recognize No.1
- apparently poor specimens of some lichen. 2, 3 & 4 I think are all
forms of one lichen Opegrapha varia
Pers. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Nov. 21 Vol. 8 (54) [H 170] My Dear Sir, Of Nov. 21st I find 1 Cladosporium herbarum 2 Cladosporium herbarum
and a little of something else probably a Thecaphora. x3 Trogia crispa
of Cookes Handbook - formerly Cantharellus
crispus Fr. x4
The green is Cladosporium herbarum
apparently. These are now thought to be only a condition of Sphaeriae. x5
Streptothrix atra B.
& C. but only threads. The spores are all gone. Nov. 23 x1 Stictis - but no spores and species
uncertain 4 Sphaeria rostrata
Fr. but sterile. 2, 3 & 5 I get no satisfaction out of. I will try to get more of the Thecophora
and make something out of it. I have observed it before but could never find
any notice of it, and now think I must notice it myself. I believe your Microsphaeria (28 Oct. 22)
on "Atragalus Cooperi?"
to be an undescribed species which ought to be dedicated to you. I have been
giving my specimens of Puccinia a thorough
overhauling and have finally concluded to restore Puccinia
Mariae-Wilsoni Clinton, as I find the spores a
little larger than those of P. Cryptotaeniae,
although of the same shape. As I now make it we have about forty species in
the State. Yours on Mentha and Monarda
is P. Menthae Pers. but differing from the typical
form in being rougher. All our American specimens have this peculiarity and
strange enough it extends to the spores of its Uredo
form - Trichobasis Labiatarum.
Your No. 6 Oct. 14 is P. Prunorum Lk. Can you spare a few more specimens of this? I never
found it. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received Nov. 21 Vol. 8 (57) [H 167] My Dear Sir, I do not make much out of the specimens of Nov. 27th 3 is what I have described in the 24th
Report under the name 4 in imperfect 2 I will send a part to Cooke for his opinion. It has a little
unusual look but is probably only a form of Nummularia
Bulliardi Tul. = (Hypoxylon nummularium Fr.) Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Nov. 29 Vol. 8 (60) [H 164] My Dear Sir, Thanks for the specimens of P. Prunorum. Of the specimens of Nov. 28 my report must be somewhat
unsatisfactory. x4
Cladosporium herbarum Lk. x9
Hydnum Erinaceus Bull. x10
Uromyces ? The spores in this and in one I find in
great abundance on leaves of Sweet flag (Acorus Calamus) are like each other and like those on Juncus effusus (U. Junci (Schw.)) I have sent the
three to M. C. Cooke to see if he can find any mark of distinction. I do not. 3 Sphinctrina ? Not on P. hirsutus
but P. laceratus or P. abietinus;
in such old specimens I depend on the habitat to decide - the former growing
on hardwood, the latter on hemlock, spruce or pine. The species is near S. tigillaris B. & Br. but I must investigate further. I
found the same thing last year but have not yet reported it. x8
This is the effete state of Gerard's Aecidium. He at first sent it to me as
on Cephalanthus but afterward found it was on Nesaea. In the dried specimens I failed to find any good
mark to separate it from Aecidium Sambuci Schw. A more careful examination of No. 7 Aug. 17 on "Cirsium" satisfies me that it is Cystopus
cubicus Str. - not C. candidus
as I formerly thought. Have you a few extra specimens of this to spare? Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Dec. 3 [Note that
question marks made far from the genus name indicate the species is in doubt,
not the genus!!] Vol. 8 (61) [H 163] My Dear Sir, Of Dec. 2nd No 1 Polyporus lacteus
Fr. 2 Polyporus scutellatus
Schw. 4 Merulius tremellosus
as you say. Schweinitz has a M. incarnatus
near this but I am not yet able to see the distinction. 5 Peziza coccinea
Jacq. variety. This is
thinner and externally smoother and brighter colored than the ordinary form.
The spores are a trifle smaller - the largest ones of this being equal to the
smallest in that, but of the same shape. A rigid splitter might make a
species of it but so far as I am able to see from the dried specimens, I perfer to regard it as a variety. I think ou once called my attention particularly to this form. I
have never found it myself. Dec. 4th 1 Stilbum pellucidum
Schrad. 2 Not able to say what. 3 Calicium - near C. lenticulare
but does not agree exactly with the description. I must leave the species
uncertain. No Sphinctrina in this. Cystopus cubicus in Cooke's Handbook is followed by the
abbreviation "Str." He does not explain what it means but I suppose
it stands for Strauss. I do not know what Mr. Gerard finally concluded to do with the
Aecidium of the Nesaea. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received Dec. 7 Vol. 8 (62) [H 162] My Dear Sir, I do not think Biatora vernalis
is limited to any particular species of moss. My specimens appear to be on Hypnum curvifolium but the moss
is so badly
incrusted it is difficult to get at the species. I also have
specimens on bark of trees and it is said to grow on the ground, wood etc. I am sure I can give no reason for the name "vernalis" for it certainly is not limited to the
spring season. I have found it in good condition in July. Names are not
always appropriate though they may have seemed so when given. I do not feel "strong" in Potamogeton.
I consider them miserable things to deal with. "A Dec 3" is the same Sphinctrina
you sent before. I hesitate to call it S. tigillaris
because the spores are .0004' - .0005' long while the description of that
species gives the spores .00015' - .0003' long. S. turbinata
has the spores globose - these are oblong. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received Dec. 9 [A series of
species names is written sideways on the back in pencil, probably in Peck's
handwriting with no other information. This is apparently scrap paper.] Vol. 8 (65) [H 159] My Dear Sir, Of Dec. 8th No 3 is the only good thing I get. It is Valsa salicina Fr. 4, 5 and 6 are apparently some obscure lichens which I do not
recognize. Undoubtedly the fungus on clover leaf is Dothidea
Trifolii Fr. It is sterile and so I apprehend it
always is - at least neither in Fries nor in Cooke's Handbook are the spores
described. Kindest regards to Miss Wilson. I am very busy on my report just now
but will make out such of her lichen desiderata as I can, by the time of the
Annual Meeting of the Regents if not before. I name Fowler's fungi so far as I can without spending too much time
on them. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Fowler's Fungi (partly) x1 Dithidea Trifolii
Fr. x2
Tremella mesenterica
Retz. "No. 0" Imperfect but probably Irpex
Tulipiferae Schw. x4 Tubercularia vulgaris
Tode x5 Hypoxylon concentricum
Fr. x6 Panus stypticus
Fr. x7
Erineum fagineum Pers. x8 Dothidea graminum
Fr. x10 Polyporus versicolor
Fr. x11
Ustilago Carbo Tul. (Ustilago segetum Dittm.) x12
Polyporus laceratus Berk.? x14 Gloeoporus nigropurpurascens
(Schw.) x18 Daedalea cinerea
Fr. x20 = 10 x21 Polyporus laceratus
Berk. x22 Lenzites betulina
Fr. x27 Ustilago urceolorum
DC. x28 = 5 x30 Imperfect but would probably make Trichobasis
Cichoracearum Lev. x31 Imperfect. Peziza resinae
and other things grow in such places. Received Dec. 13 Vol. 8 (74) [H 148] My Dear Sir, Your "Merry Christmas and Happy New Year" are most
heartily reciprocated. "A Dec. 25" is not in good condition and I am unable to
say what it is. 4 Oct. 22 is Sphaerotheca Castagnei Lev. 2 Nov. 27, sent to Cooke but he does not name it; so I have been
digging away at it and conclude it is Hypoxylon atropurpureum Fr. - an addition to our Flora. Can you
spare a specimen or two more of it? [In margin in pencil in Bulliardi?] [See letter Vol.
8 No. 57] Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Dec. 27 |
|
|