Search: letter in document-type 
1790-1799::1790 in date 
Pitchford, John in correspondent 
Sorted by:

Showing 12 of 2 items

From:
John Pitchford
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
5 Oct 1790
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/8/60, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Discusses English 'Mentha': received 'Mentha villosa' [Hudson] "Fl[ora] Ang[lica]" from [Samuel] Goodenough which confirms that 'Mentha villosa' [Ray] "Syn[opsis methodica]" 233.1 is not the true one and is probably related to 'Mentha viridis', sends specimen to Smith and makes his own observations, asks how Linnaeus has marked it and 'Mentha verticillata' in his copy of Ray's book. Requests specimen of 'Mentha sativa'; asks if Ray's 'Mentha verticillata' is same as Linnaeus'; [John] Lightfoot found only 'Mentha gentilis' around Hackney and Peckham, encloses a Norfolk specimen of it [extant]. Lightfoot believes 'Mentha viridis' is related to 'Mentha sylvestris'. Believes botanists might be wrong to disregard the length of 'Mentha' stamina.

[On separate folio] Further observations on [William] Hudson's descriptions of 'Mentha villosa', 'M. sylvestris and 'M. rotundifolia', 'M. aquatica', 'M. gentilis', 'M. arvensis', and 'M. satvia'.

Specimen of 'Mentha gentilis', label states it is from William Sole.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
John Pitchford
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
3 Dec 1790
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/24/73, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Discouraged by Smith's mention of the difficulties of settling the mints, but not yet abandoning his intention; sending Smith all his specimens, discusses 'Mentha sativa', 'M. gentilis', 'M. exigua', 'M. villosa', and 'M. sylvestris'.

Compliments to [James] Sowerby, intends to take his "little work" ["English botany"], "the botanist searches in vain for something to feast upon". Compliments Smith's "Icones pictae" but unable to purchase it. Encloses two 'Squilla' for determination.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London