Elliott, Stephen, 1771-1830. Stephen Elliott papers, 1791- approximately 1947. Letters from Henry Muhlenberg to Stephen Elliott, 1810 July 2-1812 November 11. gra00020. Archives of the Gray Herbarium, Botany Libraries, Harvard University.

[ 14 and 79 Diodia and 107 Spermacoce are nearly allied and I wish to have better specimens 107 comes exceedingly near to Spermacoce hyssopifolia Smith figured in Abbots Insects, Gärtner seems to figure it as Diodia. In the living plant you may see the difference better, pray send another specimen of 14 and 79 15. Salvia what coloour has corolla? 52. Boerhavia is radix ☉ ♃ or ♄? 71. Diad. seems now to me a new Sesbania Persoon — (calix dentib acqualibus — Legumen elongatum subcylindr. 2 valve is the character of Sesbana P.) Coronilla Willd. Securidaca Gartner) the habit is much like Aeschyn. [Aeschynomene] or Sesbania platycarpa Mich — it might be called macrocarpa long podded S. 90. Festuca is culmus allways prostratus or adscandens and is the root ☉? polystachia [polystachya] Willd. Enum. agrees very nearly and so Bromus poaformis Sprengel. 166. Physalis is radix ☉ or ♃. much I wish a better specimen. 176 and 227. I find described as a Carolina plant by the name of Cynanchum angustifolium. Persoon The Cynanchum or Gonolobus has given me much trouble and I remain uncertain untill I know more of the fruit. How would this do 1, Cynanchum obliguum. Your 27, o. petalis acutis folliscule echinato } acantho carpos 2, Cynanchum carolina --- 83, v. petatlis obtusis follisculo echinato } Walter 3. Cynanchum macrophyllum petalis folliscul. angulato — gonocarpus Walt 4 — — — laeve petalis follisculo cylindr. laevi 5 — — — — reniforme petalis obtusis follisculo 6. — — — angustifolium — — 185. Paspalum — is culmus procumbens, or is any of your Pasp. procumbens? — In the Jersies I found one in Oct. [culum ?] procumb. folis ciliatus, spica [solitarie?]. 199. is certainly not Thymus carolinianus Mich. Pray send a specime 204. 206. 211. 219: 229. 230 I wish to see again, so from your old herbarium 25 Prunus 32 Gerardia Azelia 106 Hyptis. 117. Hymenopappus 183 Cyperus gracilis 212 Astragalus 216 Salix 219 Nolina 165 Scirpus.

In particular I wish to hear from you what fruit your new shrub from Georgia has which I have in my catalogue byut the name of Elliottia Cal. 1 phyll. Cor. 4 pet. Stam 8 Pist. 1. floribus racemosis — is it Capr. or Bracea. My friends insist on it I shall wait no longer but get this catalogue printed. It is all ready for print, but I wish a little longer time for filing and improving.

Your Cryptogamia I have lookd over more then once. The mosses are plain enough, the Confervae still dark. I have compared Dillen and part of Dillwyn but see that more time and more specimens are necessary. Authors begin to examine every cyptogamous plant with so nice microscopia that more uncertainty arises then before. In Dalten, I find nothing exactly agreeing in Num. 1, 2. 4. 6, 9. 19. 13. 8. n. 3 agrees nearly with 3, 10 furcata so does 22 although different n. 23. and 24, perhaps also 25 seem to be one species. n. 28 is exactly diaphana Lightfoot according to a specimen n. 29 is nearly allied to 28. n. 31 agrees with catenata Dill 27. ]

I suppose the Confervae ought to be put for some time in water before examination and even then they will not show as well as a moss or lichen. If you send them to England Mr. Dawson Turner in Yarmouth I suppose would be the fittest to examine them. Unluckily the gentlemen are very slow in answer and I have waited from 10 — 15 years for an answer though I received promises yearly, the answer was preparing and allmost ready. We must depend on ourselves make good descriptions and leave the name to a future day.

Have you and collection of lichens and fungi? Some of the latter can be transported very easy, but others are not transportable. I describe whatever I see of vegetable, the fungi which perish very soon I just compare with copperplates I have and then I throw them away, the persistences I keep in boxes, above one half are certainly new. If you want any particular genus of the smaller sort, and I have them I will send whatever you desire.

I shall be very glad to see your Epidendrum. I know of none a growing in our parts. Catesby has figured several but I supposed they were all from the Bahama Islands. The Gynandria of Walter want elucidation as much his grasses. Doubtfull or unknown to me are his Orchis lata, Ophrys trifolia, Arethusa, Spicata and foliosa. I have marked some other plants said to grow in Carolina which I wish to see, Asclepias cordata, cinerea, viridis, Allionia, Apium bipinnatum, Cicuta perennans Walt. Anonymos (250 hardly a Ruellia) Carthamus Walt. I anticipate the pleasure I shall feel if any of those will be in good packet.

All the last summer and autumn I have been afflicted with Rheumatism in the heel which hindres me much from making long excursions and my ususal exercise. Wishing you all prosperity and health and with my best respects to Mrs. Elliot I remain unchangeably

Sir Your most obedient servant Henry Muhlenberg

P.S. I wrote this letter amidst the noise of company and beg you will excuse the haste.

2. Jany. 1811

Phanogam: 239 — 390 Cryp- 81 — 83.

[postmark] LANCAR.P 25 JAN PAID 3 Stephen Elliot Esquire at Beaufort South Carolina franco

Lancaster Jan. 2. 1811

Dear Sir

With my best wishes for your health and prosperity in this new year and for many years to come I acknowledge the receipt of your last long expected packet, which arrived safe immediately after my letter to you was forwarded that is Dec. 18. It was indeed a wellcome Christmas box and deserves my best thanks. I cant say that have studied through perfectly that will take time, as it contains many plants new to me and a number of the specimens are so unique that I hardly venture to analyze them closely untill I have another specimen. However I hasten to give my opinion on them in expectation of your indulgence and your amendments.

[ 239 Hypericum glaucum Mich. Can it be also H. denticulatum Walter # 240 Hypericum fasciculatum Mich? I have doubts 241 Hypericum nudiflorum M. # 242 Allium, can hardly be ornith. [ornithogaloides] Walter. Ciapus alatus, nearly allied to 243 243 Allium cernuum Roth, common with us 244 Asclepias incarnata Walter, nec L. longifolia Mich. corpusculo stipitato! # 245 Asclepias cinerea Walter 246 Nyssa villosa M. 247 Vaccinium myrsinites M. 248 Erigeron nudicuale [nudicaulis] 249 Erigeron strigosum [strigosus]? 250 Erigeron? I had it from Enslin by the name of Solidago noveb. I have no name 251 Polygonum hirsutum M. and Walter 252 Sagittaria graminifolia M. # 253 Hydrocharis? not morsus ranae cf. Leptanthus. 254 Pyrus botryapium, but no fruitification 255 Bumelia tenax, how is the fruit? 256 Plantago lanceolata L. common in Pennsylvania 257 Smilax hastata Willd. 258 Polygala sanguinea? the spike of our Sanguinea much thicker cf. Setacea 259 Eclipta brachypoda M. 260 Rosa caroliniana L. # 261 Cantua coronopifolia Willd. — what a fine flower for a garden. Pray send some seed. 262 Melanthera hastata M. 263 Ophiorrhiza mitreola, the same from Cherokee # 264 Cassia occidentalis M. hardly Willdenow whose occidentalis is ♄. foetida Persoon 265 Cassia tora Walter # 266 Cassia NS. very near to the hirsute variety of chamaecr. [chamaecrista] Mich. but glandula different. 267 Salicornia ambigua M. different from n 48. which an indetermediate species # 268 Erigeron or Inula (hispida) NS. 269 Hydrocotyle cymbalarifolia Willd. 270 Euphorbia polygonifolia I suppose the true one, different from your 23, O. grows on the seashore of the Jersies and NYork. 271 Scirpus triqueter L. 272 [Nat?] Scirpus pendulus, but lineatus Mich. your 165 O, is not 27 different?

285 Panicum agrostoides Schreber I think, that is my Number 42. divaricatum Mich. 286 Aira mollis mihi 171 O. next to obtusata Michaux 287 Agrostis alba L. 288 Scleria pauciflora Willd. which I think is hirtella Mich. 289 Scleria triglomerata M. 290 Poa repens Mich. #291 Iris hexagona Walter — the capsul I would wish to see 292 Alsine media L 293 Sparganium ramosum Willd. the same as 175 O, your 202 O I took for simplex. 294 Vitis aestivalis Mich. 295 Potamogeton gramineum Mich 296 Arum virginicum L 297 Scorzonera pinnatifida Mich. of Leontodon Walter 298 Schwalbea americana L. the same in the Jersies 299 Cleome pentaphylla L. very near pungens Willdenow Hortus Berol #300 Cleome N.S. if the radical leaves are the same viz cuneiform — (cuneifolia) #301 Nectris Schreber certainly #302, I took at first sight for Cicuta maculata but the Foliola triplinervia make if diff. 303 Quercus pumila Michaux — according to his Figure. 304 Ranunculus humilis Persoon I think — that is flammula Walter nec Linn 305 Ruellia near our strepens, but cal. linear nec lanc. Gardner's strepens seems the plant 306 Ruellia if the stem is assurgens not humistratus [humistrata], is oblongifolius [oblongifolia] Mich 307 Chenopodium viride, hardly our album which Willdenow names lanceolatum — 308 Chenopodium rhombifolium Willd. very near rubrum L. #309 New to me. Pray compare planera Mich. #310 Next to Sisymbrium amphibium, cf. S. tantacetif. [tanacetifolium] Walter — is the cor. yellow or white 311 Phlox glaberrima L 312 Lobelia amoena M? but caule pubesc. 313 Lobelia puberula M. #314 Lobelia crassifolia? new to me. 315 Gerardia — Linne had as variety of the next. It is certainly different and fasciculata would be a good name 316 Gerardia purpurea Herbar. Linn. #317 Gerardia N.S. may be tenuifolia Vahl I took 316 for tenuifolia 318 I think NS which with Gerardia afzelia might contitute a genus "antheris muticis" 319 Hypericum near to nudiflorum, but seems distinct cf. rosmarinifolium 320 Hypericum different from one I name galioides it grows in Georgia fol. lin. obtus. cf. asphal. 321 Inula mariana L #322 Inula gossypina Mich. new to me #323 Liatris new #324 Liatris, new 325 Glycine angulosa Willd and Phaseolus trilobus M. #326 Orchis not flava L. uncertain what else — the nearest is cristata but diff. #327 Epidendrum? nothing like it in Catesby — the specimen rather imperfect. 328 Thymus carolinianus M. grandiflorus Curtis B.M. 329 — not Amaranthus lividus, pray compare Acnida. 330 Boehmeria lateriflora Willd, but fol. oppos. Is it the male plant of n. 331? 331 Boehmeria cylindrica Willd.

[numbers 332-344 not seen]

345 Asclepias variegata Walter et Linn. hybrida Mich. 346 Asclepias obtusifolia Mich. purpurascens Walter 347 Bartonia tenella Willd Centaurella panic [paniculata] Mich 348 Anthemis cotula L. 349 Cornus paniculata Willd. (pistillum persistens) 350 Aster — paludosus perhaps, cf. tripolium Walter. 351 Scirpus hardly more than var. of retrofractus. 352 Panicum — near to your N. 33. is it allways smooth? #353 Panicum new to me, what is nudum Walter? 354 Panicum virgatum L. at least I can find no difference 355 Panicum I formerly thought new and named it pungens, now it seems a var. of dichotomum L. 356 Eleusine filiformis Persoon, a little different from mucronata M. 357 Milium conjugatum Elliot, nearly allied to Paspalum 358 Muhlenbergia diffusa Willd. Dilepyrum Mich #359 Phalaris villosa Mich. the habit not of Phalaris — new to me. Pray send more. 360 Aristida not stricta, your specimen of n. 94 seems the same both different from my racemosa so we would have dictoma, racemosa, lamosa, stricta and 94. 361 Poa the same with 92. is I think amabilis Walt. nec L. might be called reflexa — 362 Andropogon near 179 are Spicae allways trifidae? 363 Andropogon macrourus like 178. 364 Schoenus effusus Swarz #365 Schoenus rariflorus? 366 Kyllingia — the specimen hardly perfect enough to see whether monsc. [or?] triceps. 367 Fuirena squarrosa M. likewise in the Jersies 368 Scleria reticulata M. also from N Car. habitus of Schoenus gracilis 369 Juncus setaceus Willd. filiformis M. and Walter 370 Panicum, habit of nemorosum — Cal. nervosus — Uncertain 371 Tribulus — #372 Helianthus laevis Walter nec L. #373 Helianthus N.S.? the laetiflorus Persoon is the next to atrorubens, but it has [discumla?] 374 Helianthus atrorubens L. I think [375] [?] new to me, what is is can not be distinguished by the specimen. [376] [Lysimachia?] racemVernonia next to [praclataosa M. [377] Solidago scabra Willd. like 123 378 Solidago seems rugosa #379 Solidago #380 Solidago near recurvata Willd. #381 Solidago 382 Eryngium aquaticum Willd. yuccifolium M. #383 Vernonia next to praealta but seems different 384 Prenanthes virgata M. autumnalis Walt. not Sonch. leucop. [Sonchus leucophaeus] Willd 385 Eupatorium aromaticum M. 386 Eupatorium urticaef. [urticaefolium] Mich? #387 Eupatorium new to me cf. odorum [odoratum] Walter 388 Eupatorium lanceolatum Willd. [?] different form n. 154 which is perhaps [?]une folium verbenifolium Mich. seems the same with 388 [389] [content missing]

1. Feb 1811

[postmark] LANCAR.P 25 FEB PAID 1 Stephen Elliott Esq {Esquire] Beaufort franco South Carolina [impression of two leaves]

see outside Feb. 1, 1811

Dear Sir

Your letter of the 14th January arrived here very safe the 30th, and gave me, as every other, great pleasure. Very likely my second of Jan. 2. arrived soon after at Beaufort in which I acknowledged the receipt of your very excellent packet and gave you my opinion on each number. Some of the specimens were too imperfect or perhaps rubbed a little that I was unable to judge, and I beg you will remember them in particular when you favour me with a new packet. N. 253, 268, 300, 375. Funci and Schoeni or even Scripi can hardly be distinguished without having the seed [capsel?] or seed.

Some time after I received the packet I had an opportunity for Philadelpha and I made up January 16, a small bundle for you containing 50 lichenes amongst them a few from Europe which I have not found in America but I suppose they may be found. Of all I know the names for certain as they were examined by Schreber. You will oblige me very much if you mention which of them you have seen in your excursions. You have a number of lichenes in Carolina which are not to be found in Pennsylvania. I had some from N Carolina but the specimens were so small that nothing certain could be made out. The lichenes were packed in Willdenow Dioecia and Polygamia, to which you are very wellcome. The Cryptogamia I have not yet received, nor any answer to a number of letters I wrote to Europe last spring. I fear our intercourse will be long stopped, and we must do as well as we can. Perhaps we can help ourselves, if only naturalists would join. I have tried since New Year to animate a number of my former correspondents but without much success. D. Barton hardly every answers and when a letter comes it contains nothing but queries. W. Hamilton is still alive but very weak. Mr. Lyons is well. One new correspondent I gained Doctor Baldwin in Wilmington Delaware St. who promises fairly to send me the new plants of Delaware which are numerous. I have made the beginning in sending grasses and cryptogamia. He is a pupil of D Barton but laments that in those 2 classes he received no information at all.

I congratulate you on your getting three such valuable correspondents in Louis — ville, Columbia and Georgia seashore. If fMrs. Elliots brother has Bartrams Travels he would be the finest person to elucidate many of his plants mentioned, of which Bartram has no specimen, and is not able to give a sufficient description. You will not forget my Elliottia when you come to Georgia. As it has only 8. Stamina, it cant be a Clethra. I think with Mr. Lyons it is a new genus. If I understood him he has the plant living but I did not see it at my last visit.

An old query which I have not been able to get answered I recommend to you again. Have we 2 species or genera of cane? Mr. W. Bartram has he says two, one the Maiden cane your 166, o. Arundinaria tecta, the other with broader leaves like Indian Corn. Mr. Heckewalder informs me that they have 2 in the western parts, one they use for Pipe Stems, the other is larger the leaves grow at the knots as in a Verticillus. Both flower very seldom. Others inform me there is but one species, as Michaux has only the Arundinaria (Ludolfia Willd) macrosperma. The plant is Hamilton held for the real Cane is more Arundo donax a gift from Michaux but uncertain from whence.

Michaux fil. has published 2 Livraisons of his work on American Forrest Trees. The French copy has arrived at Philadelphia 14 figures well done of Pinus and Abies. Juglandes Quercus and so in all 151 trees will follow. The description is quite short in Latin with out any synonym a few cases excepted. Then he mentions the use and habitats. The 14 plates cost $6. As he figures all his plants it will be disagreeable to pay for what you have already — the Oaks in particular. He also changes the names as all French botanists are apt to do. Amongst the trees he has some from Carolina which I am uncertain of — I will repeat them to you for your opinion viz

[Pinus pungens Table Mountain Pine — (perhaps Cedrus Walter) Pinus australis long leaved Pine palustris L. and Walter. Pinus serotina Pond Pine Juglans aquatica Water bitternut Juglans laciniosa thick shellbark Hickory Juglans myristica formis Nutmeg Hickory Nut Quercus pumila. running Oak — (quer. Walter) Quercus ferruginea black Jack O. I suppose nigra L. and Mich. Fraxinus australis southern Ash Cerasus australis wild Orange — (likely caroliniana Mich. pat) Prunus angustifolia yellow wild Plumb (likely heterophylla Walt) Populus cordata Cotton Tree Populus caroliniana. Southern Poplar is this what is planted in Phil. as canadiens? Ulmus alata Whahoo [wahoo] Mespilus caroliniana Large wild Hààz. Olea americana Devil Wood Hopea tinctoria, Sweet Leaves.]

Whenever I make a new packet I will remember the Cupressus dist. [disticha] and the Polygala senega and any other plant you will please to mention to me. We have a number of trees yet to exchange especially Prunus, Pinus, Quercus. In the Cryptogamia also. The genus Sphaera is very strong with us, but above half are NS, so with the other genera. I have sent a good number to Willdenow above 10 years ago, and must wait for an answer in the species!!

If you compare Walter 250 with Ruellia, you will either find his description bad or it is not Ruellia — at least I have never found a rudiment of the 5th Stamen.

Did you ever see Abbots Insects fig. with Smiths observations on the plants? D. Barton has this superb work, but is over cautious in shewing it. The Library of Charleston or Savanna (if there is any) should have it. A great number of Georgia plants is figured. Smith I believe had to guess from the drawing and therefore may have missed more then once.

I wish very much to have your amendments and critique of my observations on your plants as you have seen the most of the plants alive. Whenever I find any thing new I will not forget to mention it.

If you choose to write to Mr. Turner who is an excellent character and understands Fucus and Conferva better than perhaps any other botanist his direction is: Dawson Turner Esq. Yarmouth Norfolk Co. England.

What do you make of Walters Quercus sinuata and villosa? And am I right in his Pinus, glabra an mitis Mich? Squarrosa inops Mich, lutea W taeda M — Cedrus pungens foliis geminis.

You remember an Asclepias sent to me by D. Brickell as amoena — I have seen none like it here, but am convinced it is true debilis of Michaux very different from the perennis W. or parviflora Aiton, which I formerly took to be debitis. Only a few of Walters Asclepiades remain in doubt with me, and I hope to see the rest by your kindness, viz his cordata if not Laurifolia M, his tuberosa, his viridis and polypachia if not incarnata L. It is a fine genus, and deserves a monographia. Do you know Cicuta perennans Walter? in the description it comes near to a plant which I take for Angelica lucida. Several of Walters umbellatae are note plainly described.

Since my last I have received from Ohio State and from Cherokee Country a number of seeds which make me wish for spring that I may get them in the ground. My grass seeds from the botanical garden have vegetated and seem to stand our climate remarkably well. Some promise to be valuable for agriculture.

With great esteem and unchangeable friendship I remain Sir Your most obed. and humble servant Henry Muhlenberg

Lancaster Febr. 1, 1811.