|
Correspondence of Charles Peck and G. W. Clinton March 4, 2011 |
|
The
Correspondence of Charles
Peck (1833-1917) and George
William Clinton (1807 1885) 1872 part 1 Vol. 8 (77) [H 145] My Dear Sir, Thanks for the Hypox. atropurpureum. Of Dec. 30 1 & 3 seem to me to be some degenerate lichen. I find no fruit
and must leave them undecided. 2 Stereum rubiginosum
Schrad. 4 No fruit & uncertain 5 & 6 I consider only a form of Puccinia
graminis DC. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck P. S. I hope to see you here in a few days and will try to have a
few specimens ready for you. C.H.P. Received Jan. 3 Vol. 8 (80) [H 141] My Dear Sir, You asked for a specimen of Aecidium Mariae-Wilsonii
but in my haste I omitted it form the specimens put up for you. Believing in
the old adage "better late than never" I send it on after you. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Jan. 13 Vol. 8 (82) [H 139] My Dear Sir, I provisionally called the Microsphaeria
on Astragalus, M. Grossulariae
but am in doubt if right. The appendages are long and flexuous, sometimes
angularly bent, and the branchlets are not clearly bidentate
at the tips; otherwise it agrees well with the description of M. Grossulariae. I tried to get a specimen of this species
from Cooke for comparison but he had none to spare, so it is now my purpose
to send a specimen of your plant to him to see what he will do with it. The
great trouble I have to contend with is the short and unsatisfactory
descriptions given of many fungi. Sometimes a specimen may agree with every
character given in a description and yet be a distinct species from the one
described. The earlier authors, Schweinitz among
the others, almost entirely neglecting the spores which frequently furnish
some of the best specific characters, have caused much confusion and
uncertainty as to their species. Schweinitz even
distributed different species under one name and thus laid the foundation for
considerable confusion. I did not come to any conclusion concerning the specimen on Alnus incana. I hope soon to
get at your specimens and give them a revision for I am aware of some
erroneous determinations among them. An instance in point is the Aecidium Peckii which I thought at first was a new species but
which afterward I concluded was only Aecidium Menthae
DC. You may rely on Puccinia Umbelliferarum for I have compared it with European
specimens authenticated by M. C. Cooke. I should have written the habitat of
the Puccinia on the labels, but I put them up in
haste, part of them while you were waiting, and this perhaps was the cause of
the "lapsus pennae"
or rather "lapsus mentis" in writing Puccinia Gerardiae when I
should have written Puccinia Gerardii
as it is in the report [note, however, his consistent use of Mariae-Wilsonii] If my Synopsis of our Pucciniae shall ever be printed I think it will be a
great advance on anything we now have for illustrating this genus. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received Jan. 16 Vol. 8 (85) [H 135] My Dear Sir, I have been engaged some days in going over your specimens and have
got up to those of 1871. When I get through I will send you the results. I inclose now a part of a specimen which I
consider new. Dr. Curtis sent me the same thing on leaves of some Aesculus. He had it labeled "Uncinula
adunca Lev." but it is very unlike that
species in every particular - mycelium, conceptacles, appendages and number
of spores. If you have two or three spare leaves with this on I would like
them. It is peculiar in its appendages which are wavy-flexuous; thus,
[drawing] I would also be glad if you could spare me two or three more leaves
of No 3 Oct. 27 1871 which I named Uncinula Bivonae Lev. The leaf I have is badly tagged out on the
margin and I am not sure what leaf it is. Can you tell from your specimens or
labeling? This has 2 spores in each ascus as
required by the description of U. Bivonae but after
all I have some doubts as to the other characters. I wish to see other
specimens if possible. We already have seven species of Uncinula
in this State, which I think is remarkable when only three species are reported
for Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received Feb. 5 Vol. 8 (86) [H 134] My Dear Sir, Thanks for the specimens of Uncinula. The
leaves look elmish but they are more
rough and more coarsely toothed than in our specimens of native elms.
I am therefore puzzled as to the habitat of this fungus. The fungus of Nov. 25, The specimen returned is a Tubercularia -
probably T. vulgaris Tode.
The species are not easily separated and are probably all mere conditions
(conidia) of Nectiae. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton P. S. Mr. Paine informs me that Asplenium montanum
has been found near Received Feb. 8 Vol. 8 (87) [H 133] My Dear Sir, Your specimens of Feb. 12/72, I call Septonema
spilomeum Berk. I trust
the Independent Ticket enclosing them was triumphantly elected. I this day send you by Express such of your specimens as I have been
able to determine. This by no means included all you have sent me. Some I am
not able to make out, some I have placed in the Herbarium, many were
imperfect or mere discolored spots and most of the fleshy Agarici
could not be safely determined in the dry state. A few things in fertile
condition I am not able to locate and will send to M. C. Cooke. I really have hopes of getting soon a few copies of my portion of
the 23d Report for distribution in advance. If we succeed in this I shall be
glad and trust it will be of some aid to those desiring an acquaintance with
our fleshy fungi. I have already prepared my Synopsis of N.Y. Uncinulae
with a plate illustrating the specific characters and purpose trying to get
the Albany Institute to publish it for me. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Feb. 19 Vol. 8 (90) [H 130] My Dear Sir, Mr. Cooke thinks the enclosed, though very near Uromyces
Junci Schw., is a good
species. I find he has also described the Uromyces
on leaves of sweet flag under the name U. pyriformis
Cooke. differing chiefly from U. Junci
in its habit. I fear my days for public botanizing are nearly over. Our reform
Legislature has seen fit to insert in the Appropriation Bill, now reported, a
clause abolishing the office of botanist instead of making the usual
appropriation therefor. Unless this can be changed
back again of course I am undone, and I suppose the odds are against me since
Mr. Alvord is said to be especially opposed to every thing that has the name
of science. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received Feb. 22 Vol. 8 (92) [H 128] My Dear Sir, I consider the fungus on horn (A Feb. 22) to be Onygena
equina Pers. I suspect it is rather rare although I
have never looked especially for it"B Feb.
22" is not Zygodesmus fuscus.
It seems to me to be an imperfect state of Eutypa spinosa Tul., which is Sphaeria spinosa Pers. in the older works. I have been thinking that I did not state explicitly, in my letter
of the 21st, the state of my case before the Legislature. The clause in the
Appropriation Bill which heretofore has been "For the employment of
botanist etc.", in the New Appropriation Bill which is printed and has been
reported is now made to read, The office of botanist is hereby abolished from
the first of October, 1872. The clause pertaining to the Entomologist of the
State Agricultural Society is similarly worded so that I suspect Mr. Alvord
means to deny in toto all State support to
scientific investigation. He has had things pretty much his own way thus far
in the Legislature so that I have little expectation that the Bill, in this
respect can be amended. I would not think quite so hard of it if the Bill
incorporating the State Museum of Nat. Hist. had not authorized me to believe
that my work would certainly be continued another year. It seems to me to be
a species of bad faith on the part of the Legislature or something at least
approaching it, should they cut me off now. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton P. S. I have sent your Microsphaeria Grossulariae? (on Astragalus Cooperi) to Cooke. I
now believe you have a new species on leaves of Oxalis stricta. Received Feb. 24 Vol. 8 (94) [H 126] My Dear Sir, Yours of the 22d inst. has just now been received. No. 1 is a lichen but I do not recognize
the species. No2
is in an imperfect condition - mere cells, not determinable. Puccinia prophyrogenitaCurt. and P. acuminata Pk. are one and the same thing. The history of
the naming is this. I found it among my early discoveries of fungi and
finding no description of it I sent it to Dr. Curtis asking him what species
it was. He replied Puccinia Waldsteiniae
Curt. I had a specimen of P. Waldsteiniae from Dr.
Howe nd upon comparing the two I became satisfied
that my specimens were distinct. I again wrote to Dr. Curtis giving him my
views in the case and pointing out to him the distinctive characters. Then he
gave thename P. porphyrogenita
to my specimens on Cornus Canadensis. I did not like the
name, nor did I think it quite fair that he should take advantage of my labor
in correcting his error and deprive me of the right to name the species.
Still I admitted his name through courtesy and should have retained it, but
in my investigations of our Pucciniae the past
season I found that the purplish color was by no means a constant character
of the species and as no description had yet been published and as I was well
aware that Dr. Curtis never intended to publish it I thought best to change
its name to what seemed to me a more appropriate one. I do not generally
allow myself to do anything that looks like meanness on my part, but in this
case I thought I would risk it for the sake of improving a name. I begin to indulge a faint hope that, if Mr. Alvord should not be
obstinately unreasonable, it may be possible to get the appropriation restored. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton P. S. I think the other specimens I desired were Polyporus
conchifer Schw. and Sporocybe calicioides Fr. C. H. P. Received Feb. 27 Vol. 8 (96) [H 124] My Dear Sir, Cyathus campanulatus Fr. and Nidularia
campanulata Sow. are synonyms of Cyathus vernicosus DC. Both Berkely and Cooke give this last name preference whence I
suppose it has priority. Of Feb. 27th xA seems to me to be an undescribed species of Thelephora. T. Sowerbei Berk.
seems to come nearest to it, being pure white and infundibuliform,
but it is said to be rough and aculeate on the upper surface - a character
which I do not detect in your specimens xB Apparently some old Sphaeria,
but being without fruit it is not easy to say what the species is. xC Graphis scripta Ach. (A lichen) xD
Imperfect xE
Phlebia radiata Fr. This
seems to be the bright colored form which Schweinitz
thought a distinct species and named P. cinnabarina xF Hydnum Erinaceus Bull. Trichobasis Cichoracearum = Uredo
Cichoracearum, the latter being used before the
genus Trichobasis was separated from Uredo. The Handbook considers this species to be a
dimorphic form of Puccinia Compositarum. I do not now think of anything more that you can do in the matter of
the appropriation unless you may think of some one beside those already written
to who would be likely to have a favorable influence with Mr. Alvord. I doubt
if anything can now be done till the Bill comes before the Senate Committee Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received Feb. 29 - Vol. 8 (97) [H 123] My Dear Sir, I was in some doubt whether the Microsphaeria
on Alnus leaves was a variety of M. penicillata or a distinct species and therefore sent a
specimen to M. C. Cooke. When I get his reply I will tell you what it is. The Sphaerotheca on Taraxacum
is S. Castagnei Lev. This species occurs on a great
variety of leaves. Of Feb. 28 1 is in poor condition - no fruit, and I am not sure what it is. 2 Cyathus vernicosus
DC. it is the same as C. campanulatus. 3 Excipula n. sp. This, the white Thelephora and the Microsphaeria
on Oxalis are, so far as I know, all undescribed, and you being the
discoverer, have the right to name if you are so disposed. If not, let me
know and I will try to fill up the blanks. The boxes by Express have just arrived and I will see what I can
make of the contents. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton P. S. I should have said that 4 & 5 are not fungi - the one
seems to be mere
whitish specks, the other the work of insects. Received March 3 Vol. 8 (99) [H 121] My Dear Sir, Of Feb. 29th x1
& 4 are x2
& 3 are x5
is Uncinula flexuosa Pk. x6
is no fungus. I never saw good specimens of Gerard's Microsphaeria
Peckii, although I have collected a Microsphaeria on elder leaves twice; so that I am yet
uncertain if there really is such a species. I have communicated my Synopsis
of N.Y. Uncinulae to the Albany Inst.and
if the publishing Committee decide favorably, it
will be published ere long. A plate accompanies it illustrating the specific
characters. Of Mar. 1st x1
Uncinula clintonii Pk. x2 Imperfect - mere cells without definite structure 3 Imperfect x4 Imperfect x5
& 11 I don't understand these at all. x7 Sent to Cooke for his opinion x8 Imperfect x9
Fusarium erubescens B.
& C. according to specimens from Dr. Curtis. I have seen no description. x10
Imperfect. x12
Seems to be a Periconia, but the spores are
singular. I think it is undescribed. Prof. Hall has commenced work with a view to correct Mr. Alvord's
unwarrantable and wicked crusade against scientific labor. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received March 3 Vol. 8 (101) [H 119] My Dear Sir, The letter of Mr. Lewis cheers me very much. It raises my hopes from
32* [degree sign] at least up to 72*. Of Mar 2d x1 has no fruit and is uncertain x2
Cytispora
All the Cytispora are now regarded as forms
of species of Valsa. This is probably a form of V. ambiens. x3
Helminthosporium macrocarpum
Grev. x4
Nemaspora crocea Pers.
Cooke in Handbook says this is the spermogonia of Melanconis stilbostoma. x5
Not determined. I have quite a number of Myxogasters
undetermined, but I hope to clear them up some time. x6
Corticium Oakesii B.
& C. according to Dr. Curtis. I have seen no description of this. x7 Phlebia radiata
Fr. x8
Sphaeria
. I sent this to Cooke last summer but he did not determine it. I
suspect it is undescribed. If I do not hear from it before I make another
report I shall name and describe it. x9 Stereum purpureum
Fr. Of Mar. 3d I am unable to make out anything very satisfactorily. x1
May be Polyporus ferrugineus
but there is nothing sure about it. So many Polypori
have both a resupinate and a dimidiate form that
they are puzzling. Our species need a careful revision. x2
Peziza Tiliae Pk.
apparently, but it is too old. x3 Imperfect x4 Imperfect x5
This Peziza is common but I never could find a
description to meet it. Think I must send it to Cooke. 6 Probably a form of Polyporus elegans 7 & 10 Not determined. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received March 5 Vol. 8 (104) [H 116] My Dear Sir, Of Mar. 4, No. 1 is Vermicularia Dematium Fr., at least so much of it as is fully
developed. The very minute dots are without fruit and uncertain. 2 & 3 are both sterile and uncertain - the former some Valsa and the latter probably a Leptostroma. I have finished the examination of the specimens in the boxes and
will return by Express those that I have thought I could identify. Among
these Ag. silvaticus is new to me, so also is the
white Amanita (unnamed) Should you find this again I would be glad if you
would make a few notes of the character of the plant when fresh, whether
smooth or rough, dry or viscid, striate on the margin or even, and see if
there is any trace of a valve at the base of the stem. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received March 7 Vol. 8 (105) [H 115] My Dear Sir, Of Mar. 5th, I make x1
Imperfect. It looks some like Valsa stilbostoa but is not good. x2 No fungus x3
Vermicularia acuminata Schw. x4
Not determinable. x5
Microsphaeria
I am waiting Mr. Cooke's opinion of this. x6
One piece contains some sterile Hysterium - the
other is a Sphaeria, apparently the same that grows
on oak bark, of which I am waiting for M. C. Cookes
decision. z7
Uromyces appendiculata
Lev. x8
Puccinia Polygonorum Lk. x9 Appears to be a Septoria but I find no
description of it, nor any spore tendrils x10
& x13 Coryneum clavaesporum
Pk but without spores. x11 Imperfect x12 Valsa quaternata
Fr. x14
Tubercularia granulata
Pers. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received March 8 Vol. 8 (106) [H 114] My Dear Sir, Of Mar. 6th x1 & x2 Apparently a Colpoma.
I wish to send this to Cooke. x3
Diatrype disciformis Fr.?
The spores are a little longer than given in the description and therefore I
have some doubt concerning the species. x4
Vermicularia, but species uncertain. x5
Imperfect. x6 Illosporium roseum
Fr. x7 No fungus 8 No fungus. x9 Sterile and not determinable x10 Imperfect x11
Sterile but looks like Leptostroma vulgare. x12 Imperfect Of Mar. 7th x1
No fungus. x2
Aecidium tenue Schw. x3 No fungus x4
Imperfect. Apparently some sterile Hypoxylon x5
No good fungus. I sent this to Cooke but he could give me no help.x6 Streptothrix atra B. & C. (fide Dr. Curtis) This is one of their
many undescribed species. x7
Cytispora
Probably a form of Valsa ambiens. x8
Sphaeria fimbriata Pers. x9
Looks like young Aethalium septicum. x10
Seems like the beginning of a Phytisma. x11 Young Trichia clavata x12
& x13 Imperfect. Of Mar. 8th x1
Not P. ferruginosus but I am uncertain what the
species is. It approaches resupinate Polyporus salicinus Fr. x2 Imperfect x3
Looks like imperfect Peziza Agassizii
B. & C. x4
Polyactis vulgaris Lk. ? x5 Sphaeria hirsuta
Fr. x6
Nectria ochracea Fr. This
is new to us and the specimens are imperfect being without asci, yet I have scarcely a doubt of its identity. x7
Melampsora populina Lev. 8 Not good. x9 Hypoxylon multiforme
Fr. x10
Sterile and uncertain. 11 Stemonitis fusca
Roth. 12 Uncertain x13
Trichis turbinata With. x14 No fungus x15 Sterile & uncertain 16 Erysiphe communis
Shcl. x17 Imperfect Of Mar. 9th x1
Sterile but apparently Microthyrium Smilacis DeNot. x2
Hydnum sulphureum Schw. 3 Stemonitis typhoides
DC. x4 Cytispora x5
Immature. x6 Sterile & uncertain x7
Hypoxylon coccineum Bull.
in Handbook = Hypoxylon fragiforme Pers. x8
Eutypa spinosa Jul. x9 Vermicularia sterile & species uncertain x10 No fungus x11 Imperfect x12 & x13 No fungus x14
Puccinia Prunorum Lk. x15 No fungus x16 Imperfect Of Mar. 10th x1 Sterile & Uncertain
2 Not in good condition x3, x4, x9,x10 I have already sent to
Cooke and await his reply x5
Valsa Pini A. & S. Mar. 9. 6 Too old to be determined 7 Not determined 8 Must try Cooke on this 11 No fungus x12 Apparently some Erineum but I don not
find it described x14
Aecidium - probably undescribed. If you find it next season please send x15 Stereum hirsutum
Fr. x16 Conferva, but I am unable to tell the
species x17 Uncertain x18 Sphaeronema species uncertain x19 The perfect specimens = 7 x20 Valsa ambiens
Fr. The box has arrived. I will examine to-morrow. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received March 9 Vol. 8 (108) [H 112] My Dear Sir, x Agaricus vaginatus Bull. belongs to the
subgenus Amanita. x Ag. cespitosus M.
A. C. in Curtis' Catalogue is in the subgenus Collybia. x Ag. fabaceus
Berk. (Psalliota) x Ag. spumosus Fr.
(Flammula) I have been unable to do much for two or three days but hope to get
to work again soon. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received March 14 [It is somehow
amazing to read of all the work involved here - especially with Vol. 8 (110) [H 110] My Dear Sir, My bilious attack still hangs on and keeps me in the house, but I
expect to be out again soon. Thelephora Willeyi Clinton Microsphaeria Russellii Clinton is
the way I have put the new species in my notes and expect to put them in my
next report if the Legislature should not send us flying back toward the
"dark ages". Mr. Alvord still persists in his wicked conspiracy and refuses to
give the least heed to reason or the demands of justice. As I feared in the
first place, he is evidently determined to have his own way, be it right or
wrong; and the only way for our restoration is to get the Senate to insert
the appropriation and then outvote Alvord when it comes to the Assembly for
concurrence. The only reason, so far as I can learn, that he gives for his
course, is that he is opposed to appropriations by the State for scientific
purposes. And yet he allows $10,000 to the I have strong hopes that the Senate at least will not countenance
such injustice, for I can not look upon it in any other light than the
virtual violation of the good faith of the State, which was pledged to the
continuance of my work at least another year. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received March 16 Vol. 8 (111) [H 109] My Dear Sir, Of the specimens of Mar. 11 I make out but few. x17 is Exidia glandulosa
Fr. x19 Cytispora leucosperma
- a form of Valsa ambiens
Fr. x20
Sphaeria Doliolum Pers. x21
Myriangium Curtisii Tuck. 13 & x10 are lichens but I do not feel sure of the species. The other numbers are "nil" or imperfect. I regret that Uncle Sam should have thought it necessary to mash the
fine Agarics of Mar. 12th. I think it a beautiful new species of the subgenus
Lepiota. Mar. 13 1 & 2 Cladosporium herbarum
Tode - x
a, b, & 3 Erysiphe lamprocarpa
Lev. I was disappointed to find so few good things in the Muller
specimens. I have placed a slip of paper with all that I deem nameable. The
others are either no fungus at all or very imperfect. It is strange that such
a well marked species as Phragmidium mucronatum should occur under three different names. Thelephora Willeyi is all right. My last letter was
written while I was confined to the house by sickness and in relying on
memory I find I was in error in attributing Ag. cespitosus M.A.C. to the
subgenus Clitocybe. I do not think it has ever been
described. No! I am wrong. Curtis gives Lentinus caespitosus Berk. as being the same, and this is described in Lea's
Catalogue. Geoglossum atropurpureum according to Fries was
first named Clavaria atropurpurea
Batsch. and afterwards
Fries put it in the genus Geoglossum. I should
write it Geoglossum atropurpureum
Batsch. Tuckerman would say G. atropurpureum (Batsch.) Fr. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton P. S. Will return the Muller specimens in a day or two. C. H. P. Received March 20 Vol. 8 (112) [H 108] My Dear Sir, Of March 18th x11
There are discolored spots but the fungus seems to be wanting. x12 Two things - one imperfect, the other, Valsa
centripeta Fr. x13
Tympanis alnea Pers. but too old to be valuable. 14 Nothing good. x15
Seems to be Cytispora leucosperma
a form of Valsa. x16
Valsa centripeta Fr. I
have never seen this before and if you have it in quantity would like a
little more. It is a handsome species. x17
& 18 Apparently Leptostroma vulgare
Fr. which is said to be an imperfect state of Hysterium
commune. The Senate Committee have restored the
appropriation and we hope Alvord will not succeed in defeating its passage. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received March 23 Vol. 8 (113) [H 107] My Dear Sir, Your first installment of Mar. 18th did not reach me till after I
had replied to the second. x1 No fruit & uncertain 2 A fungus but not sufficiently developed for determination x3
Some Cladosporium and some other things intermixed.
I know not what. x4 No fungus x5 Undeveloped Polyporus x6 No fruit and uncertain x7
Coniothecium toruloideum
B. & C. x8
Cytispora fugax Fr. - a
form of Valsa salicina. x9
No fruit but probably Valsa salicina. x10
Some Stereum - too old. I also received from Dr. Howe, a few days ago, his "record of a
few Molds" etc. which was the first intimation I had that he was about
to engage in an independent line of publication of fungi from this State. I
saw him but a few days before he sent the slip and he said nothing about it,
from which I suppose he intended a little surprise. It is probably one of the
Dr's little eccentric freaks, or perhaps he thinks there is more honor in
publishing for himself than in having it done by
others. I have promised him the privilege of naming any new species he might
send me, but he seems to have declined the offer. The only species mentioned
in his paper of which I have specimens from him is the M. Duby's
Lev. I have already sent a special request for the others. Until I see his
specimens it is scarcely possible to say how far I can agress
with his determinations. So far as I can judge from his descriptions his Uncinula luculenta is a good
species. His U. Americana is probably not specifically distinct from my U. Ampelopsidis as the only character he assigns to it
wherein it differs is the greater length of the appendages, and as these are
quite variable in my specimens this is scarcely a reliable specific
distinction. If his specimens on Ampelopsis are the same as yours and mine I
am very confident he is wrong in referring them to U. Wallrothii.
Mine certainly do not agree with the description of U. Wallrothii
neither are they at all "closely allied to U. adunca"
as Cooke says U Wallrothii is. Dr. Howe is
certainly unfortunate in classing his species among the molds. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received March 24 Vol. 8 (115) [H 104] My Dear Sir, The little companion of Hexagonia carbonaria is sterile and indeterminable. The specks on carex leaves are nothing good. Of Mar. 26 x1 The red belongs to the lichen - Physcia
obscura v. erythrocordii x2 Exidia glandulosa
Fr. x3
Sphaeria ulmea Schw. x4 no fungus x5 Imperfect x6
& x10 Nothing good. x7 Imperfect 8 Leptostroma vulgare
Fr. Said to be a form of Hyst. commune x9,
x11, x12, x13, x14, x15 all imperfect and indeterminable. x16 seems to be a Phoma but I am uncertain x17 Sphaeria Tiliae
Pers (in part) x18
Too old. Mr. Alberger's letter cheers me. I begin
to think that Alvord is about the only unreasonable man in the Legislature
and I guess he will fail in his base purpose. I am sure the case only needs a
fair statement before the House to insure its support. We consider it sure
enough in the Senate. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received March 29 Vol. 8 (117) [H 102] My Dear Sir, Of the specimens of Mar. 27 I would say thus x1 Polyporus versicolor
Fr. x2
& x4 forms of the same. It is as Fries says, a
variable species. x3 Polyporus adustus
Fr. x5 Daedalea unicolor
Fr. x6
Cladosporium herbarum Lk. x7 No spores - too old x8
No spores but it appears to be to be Sphaeria picea Pers. x9
I sent this to Cooke and await his determination. I can hardly think it is Sphinctrina tigillaris. x10
Too old. I do not recognize it. Of Mar. 29 1 Is not in good condition x2,
3, & 4 puzzle me. 3 has spores that ooze out as
in Septoria, only in masses instead of in tendrils.
I think it is a Septoria - aberrant and probably
undescribed. 4 has filaments and spores resembling
those of Cladosporium but they are covered by the
cuticle of the leaf - a thing I have not before seen in a Cladosporium. In the specimens I bought of Dr. Curtis I find Septoria
Vitis B. & C. with spores thus [drawing]; also Septoria Viticola B. & C.
with spores thus [drawing] whence I suppose they intend two species, though I
find but one (the former) in Dr. C's Catalogue. "Peziza granulata
Bull" consists of a very few quite small specimens with orange disk
which you sent a long time ago. I do not remember of ever giving them another
name. You may have sent all you found as they were found in a flower pot. I have heard from Cooke in reference to some of your specimens 4 Sept 10 Microsphaeria penicillata var. Coryli B Oct 14 Microsphaeria penicillata
var. Coryli 17 Sept. 23 Microsphaeria Dubyi Lev. 22 & 23 Oct. 22 on Alnus. Microsphaeria penicillata var. Alni ?
= (Erysiphe Alni
Tul.) This he gives with a query. He will probably
change it hereafter. 15 & 28 Oct. 22 Microsphaeria holosericea Lev. This is what I doubtfully referred to M.
Grossulariae (on Astragalus
Cooperi). 11 June 28 Peziza hesperidea C.
& P. n. sp. 15 July 15 Peziza hesperidea C.
& P. n. sp. This is the pretty red Peziza from After several unsuccessful attempts I succeeded this morning in
finding Mr. Alberger and had an interview with him
and Mr. Husted. Both were favorably disposed and will work for the
restoration of the appropriation but it is pretty evident to my mind that
Alvord means to fight it and will only yield to a majority against him. He
has projudged the case and will not listen to a
word of reason on it. He is extremely self-willed and if he has the power
will certainly keep out the appropriation. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Ap. 2 [**15 July 15 Peziza
hesperidea C. & P. n. sp. This is the pretty
red Peziza from Vol. 8 (120) [H 99] My Dear Sir, Of Apr. 4 No. 1 This does not seem to be a fungus - at all events I can make
out no definite structure. 2 Tubercularis vulgaris
so far as I can see, but its habitat gives presumptive evidence that it may
be the primary form of Nectria Ribis. 3 Dothidea crystallopora
B. & C. I suspect Sphaeropsis Maclurae Curtis is only the conidioid
state of this species. No. 1 on Carex platyphylla
I had received before and must have forgotten to mention it. I hope you got
the letter in which I supposed I had mentioned it - for in it I reported
Cooke's decision concerning two, or three of your specimens which had been in
doubt or erroneously referred by me. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Ap. 7 Vol. 8 (123) [H 96] My Dear Sir, Of Apr. 5th I think 1 is Cladosporium herbarum
Lk. 2 & 3 probably a condition of the same thing. 4 & 5 imperfect and not determinable On Vinca seems to be a Septoria
but I find no such species described. Apr. 6 1 I think is a lichen (young or imperfect) 2 Imperfect 3 Puccinia Graminis
Pers. This form I have called var. brevicapra in my
Synopsis of N.Y. Puccinia. The P. Andropagi Schw. is scarcely to
be recognized from his description. 4 Imperfect 5 Coniocybe pallida
(Pers.) Fr. A lichen Very truly yours Charles H. Peck P. S. I saw Rev. J. A. Paine this morning. He sends his respects to
you. C.H.P. Received Apr. 9 Vol. 8 (124) [H 95] My Dear Sir, Of Apr. 7th No. 1 Dinemasporium I think an undescribed species. 2 Cladosporium on one leaf. x3
Puccinia Caricis CD. 4 Imperfect - if Peziza Persoonii it is not well developed - no spores. x5 Sterile and uncertain x6
Looks like a Phoma but I do not find it described. x7
& x12 Hypocrea Richardsonii
B. & M. x8 Imperfect x9 Imperfect x10 Seems to be the beginning of Irpex cinnamomeus x11 Imperfect x13
Phlebia zonata B. &
C. x14 Imperfect x15 Daedalea unicolor
Fr. x16 Stereum striatum Fr. If you choose to give a name to No. 1 please let me know what you
will call it. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Vol. 8 (128) [H 90] My Dear Sir, Of Apr. 8th xNo. 3 I think is Glenospora
Ramorum B. & C.. = (Demetium Ramorum Schw.)I find no fruit in the others and am not able to
say what they are. . Of Apr. 9th x1
Stictis
species uncertain. x2
Not in very good condition but I should call it Physcia
stellaris (L.) - a Lichen. x3
Melanopsora Tremulae Lev. x4,x5, & x6 are not good and uncertain. x7 Puccinia
angustata Pk. in Report of /71 x8 & x9 sterile and uncertain x10
Peziza fascicularis A.
& S. x11
Cytispora chrysosperma
Fr. - a form of Valsa nivea. x12
Coniothecium toruloideum
C. & C. x13 Imperfect x14
Hypoxylon Morsei B. &
C. x15 Returned x16
Valsa
? x17
& x18 Valsa nivea Fr.
but not in very good contition. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Apr. 18 Vol. 8 (129) [H 39] My Dear Sir, Of Apr 10th No. 1 I fail to find the fungus. x2
Stilbospora ovata Pers. x3 Imperfect x4 Sphaeropsis species not determined x5
Dinemasporium acerinum n.
sp. x6
Hendersonia Robiniae
West. x7 & x8 Not in determinable condition x9
A scale insect. I thought perhaps we should see you here to attend Mr. Corning's funeral.
Will send the Report as you suggested. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Ap. 18 Vol. 8 (134) [H 84] My Dear Sir, The specimens of Apr 11 were sent to the Dead Letter Office at I makex1,
x2 & x3 to be Tubercularia vulgaris
Tode. x4
Phoma longissimum Berk. (Sphaeria longissima Pers.) x5
I have received this from several sources and sent it to Cooke long ago but
he does not venture any decision on it. Suppose, to settle the matter at
present, we call it Sphaeria diplodioides
n. sp. x6 Poor and not determinable x7 Mere cells x8 Imperfect Of Apr. 22d I get not much good. 1 Is insect work - the gall of some Aphis. 2 I find no fungus x3
Is much like Diatrype disciformis
in external appearance but the spores are more like D. Duriaei.
I have sent it to
Cooke for his opinion. x4 & x5 Imperfect Of Apr. 20th 1 Imperfect 2 Hypoxylon cohaerens
Fr. 3 & 4 Hypoxylon argillaceum
Fr. x5
Too old. x6 Imperfect x7 Hyaterium but no spores x8 Imperfect 9 Not determined x10 Sphaeria Doliolum
Fr. 20 Imperfect Apr. 18th x1 Undetermined x2
Tubercularia vulgaris
Toda. x3 Not in good condition x4 Not in good condition x5 Sterile and indeterminable x6 Seems to be an Epicoceum x7
& x8 Imperfect. x9 & x10 Nectria cinnabarina
Fr. x11 Imperfect x12 Polyporus betulinus
Fr. x13 & x14 Imperfect x15
Septoria Herbarum B.
& C. x16
Frullania Eboracensis Lehm. (Hepatic) x17
Cenangium triangulare Schw. x18 & x19 Undetermined x20 Sterile and not determined x21 Imperfect x22
Irpex Tulipiferae Schw. I think. x23 Nectria cinnabarina
Fr. x24 Tubercularia Celastri
Schw. but I doubt if it is really distinct from T. vulgaris x25 Imperfect x26 Nectria cinnabarina
Fr. x27 Nectria cinnabarina
Fr. x28, x29 & x30 Imperfect x31
Depazea Kalmicola Schm. x32 Excrescence of Podisoma x33
Lenzites tricolor Fr.? x34
Phoma brunneo-tinctum B.
& C. x35 Exidia glandulosa
Fr. x36 Valsa stellulata
Fr. x37 & x38 imperfect x39
Streptothrix atra B.
& C. x40
Not determined. 41 Stereum acerinum
Fr. x42
Stegonosporium betulinum
Pk. in. ed. x43 Stereum complicatum
Fr. x44
Poor. x
Mr. Cooke gives your No. 7 March 1st as Sphaeria mutans C. & P., a new species. Our appropriations have passed the Senate all right, but a committee
of conference was called for in the assembly. Alvord is doing his best to
defeat us and I greatly fear he will accomplish his purpose. He is as
unreasonable and obstinate as he well can be. The thing I suppose will be
decided in a day or two. We probably shall fail for the lack of a single vote
in the committee - so near it seems a great pity. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Ap. 25 Vol. 8 (135) [H 83] My Dear Sir, Since my gloomy conjectures of yesterday, the clouds have broken
away. Gov. Seymour made his appearance just at the critical moment, saw some
of the Assembly members of the Conference Committee and this morning was
before the Committee iself, and has just brought
word that the appropriation for botanist has passed the Committee all right.
I feel glorious again, and hardly know how to express my gratitude to my
friends who have so generously come to my rescue in this case. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received Ap. 25 Vol. 8 (137) [H 81] My Dear Sir, x1 Sterile and uncertain x2
No fruit and nothing to indicate whether it is a fungus or a part of the
lichen. x3
Spores but no asci. I suspect it is a form of Sphaeria lagenaria. x4 Polyporus but species uncertain x5
Hysterium
Can you send some more of this? I wish to try Cooke on it. x6 Imperfect x7 & x8 Imperfect x9
Seems to be Orthotrichum crispum
or crispulum. No good capsules. x10
Diatrype (Diatrypella) betulina Pk. in Ed. 11 No spores and uncertain x12 Too young x13
Very poor but looks like a Cenarigium. x14, x15 & x16 Imperfect x17
Corticium but I am not sure of the species. x18 Imperfect x19
& x21 Cooke names this Diatrype brunnea C. & P. I had supposed it was D. obesa B. & C. but they not having described their
species I suppose have left it very uncertain what it is. x20
Seems to be Valsa Pini A.
& C. but the yellow stroma is not shown by it,
hence it is in some doubt. A very unsatisfactory report but the best I can do at present. There
are a multitude of
minute black atoms on fallen leaves and dead herbaceous stems
that I have examined time and again but almost always without finding any
trace of fruit. I suppose them to be mere beginnings or imperfect states of
various Sphaerias. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Judge G. W. Clinton Received [no notation of date received] Vol. 8 (139) [H 79] My Dear Sir, Of Apr. 26th 1 & 2 I find some Cladosporium threads
and spores, but get no satisfaction out of either. 3 This according to specimens from Dr. Curtis is Massaria
macrospora B. & C. It is apparently the same as
Massaria gigaspora Desm. which Cooke gives as
synonymous with M. inguinans Tode.
Not being satisfied about this I sent it to Cooke some time ago and await his
reply. 4 I get no fungus here. It seems to be a singular gummy exudation. Apr. 27 "The first of the Agarics" Cortinarius
(Hygrocybe) vernalis Pk.
See 23 Rep. p. 112 Cooke has named your 1 & 2 March 6 thus Colpoma
juniperinum C. & P. 3 Marc. 6th Diatrype disciformis
Fr. Very truly yours Charles H. Peck Received May 1 |
|
|