Search: Pitchford, John in author 
1780-1789::1789 in date 
Sorted by:

Showing 15 of 5 items

From:
John Pitchford
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
6 Jan 1789
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/24/69, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Comments on 'Ophrys paludos' of "Flora Danica", which resembles 'O. loeslii' Linnaeus; and 'Equisetum sylvaticum', which he discovered to be 'E. fluviatile'. Sends specimens of 'Carex gracilis' Curtis and 'C. caespitosa'; observations, including remarks by [Samuel] Goodenough. Requests 'Dianthus glaucus'.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
John Pitchford
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
4 Feb 1789
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/24/70, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Sends specimens for determination, to be returned: one is possibly the true 'Dianthus glaucus' and the other a 'Potamogeton'. Received letter from [Samuel] Goodenough in which he states 'Carex caespitosa' does not grow in England; disagrees, also mentions 'C. gracilis'. Encloses 'Jungermania asplenioides' gathered near Holy-well, Flintshire; observations, it may be 'viticulosa'.

Asks after particulars of Smith's projected new work ["Icones pictae plantarum"]; hopes he will not forget a "Flora Britannica", the need for one. Sending specimens for Linnean Society of 'Salsola fruticosa' and 'Carex caespitosa' "Fl[ora] Ang[lica]". Believes 'Sparganium natans' will turn out to be 'S. simplex' Fl Ang.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
John Pitchford
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
26 Feb 1789
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/24/71, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Thanks for specimens. Asks if [John] Lightfoot's annotated copy of [William] Hudson's "Flora Anglica" is still for sale at White's. [Thomas] Woodward agrees with him that his 'Carex caespitosa' is not 'C. gracilis' in a small state, as Smith and [Samuel] Goodenough think; observations. Sent Goodenough two specimens of a possible 'Galium isuliginosum'. Thanks for Smith's notes on 'Dianthus glaucus'; observations. Sending "smallest known" 'Potamogeton', possibly Hudson's 'P. setacea', and possible 'Lichen pertusus'.

Specimen label attached with note "'Mucor infusorius' Lee", no specimen extant.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
John Pitchford
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
29 Jun 1789
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/24/72, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Sending Smith specimens of 'Holosteum umbellatum'. Congratulates Smith on his publication ["Reliquiae rudbeckianae" (1789)] and praises the drawings. Saw that Smith intends to give up further investigation of English 'Carex caespitosa'; argues that the "great & little plants"are the same species and not varieties, caused by differences in soils and climates. Requests 'Alisma natans'. Mr Rigby, Mr Morgan, and two others are going to the glaciers; hints from Smith on what may be found would be appreciated. Encloses specimen for determination. Found 'Selinum palustre'.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London
From:
John Pitchford
To:
Sir James Edward Smith
Date:
5 Dec 1789
Source of text:
GB-110/JES/COR/8/59, The Linnean Society of London
Summary:

Thanks Smith for naming foreign plants he sent, including 'Geranium cicutarium', explains his errors in determining them himself, including: 'Arenaria'; reasons for disputing what Smith named 'Galium pusillum'; uncertain if 'Dianthus rupestris' is not 'Dianthus caryophyllus'; disappointed that Smith has rejected [James] Crowe's 'Rubus [corylifolius]' as a distinct species on [Richard] Salisbury's belief that it is a variety of 'Rubus fruticosos'. Sends regards to [Samuel] Goodenough and [Robert] Batty. The Forsters convinced that [Pitchford's] 'Chenopodium album' and 'Chenopodium viride' are distinct. Crowe growing 'Poa angustifolia' and 'Poa nemoralis'. Observes how different the foreign 'Asperula cynanchica' is from the English one.

Contributor:
The Linnean Society of London