190 Rhodora [DECEMBER 
In February, 1900, Dr. Brainerd published in Ruopona the follow- 
ing paragraph: 
"Rubus sativus. This is Rubus nigrobaccus, var. sativus, Bailey, 
which we are confident should be regarded as a distinct species. As 
we find it in western Vermont it is farther removed from R. nigro- 
baccus than any of the four forms last mentioned . . . . The 
name chosen by Professor Bailey is most appropriate, as the species 
is the parent of some of our best garden varieties. "'! 
In December of the same year he recognized it as “R sativus, 
Brainerd. (R. nigrobaccus, Bailey, var. sativus, Bailey). In dry 
alluvial soil; Weybridge, Brainerd; West Rutland, Eggleston."* But 
in April, 1914, Dr. Brainerd said: “the Vermont plant identified as 
‘a small form of R. nigrobaccus var. sativus’ by Prof. Bailey (see 
Ruopona 2: 24, Feb., 1900 [i. e., p. 26, where he forgot to state that 
Bailey had so determined it]), and described as R. sativus in the 
Gray Manual, and as R. Brainerdii by Dr. Rydberg . . . is 
hardly more than a dwarf form of R. pergratus Blanchard." * Only 
one year later, in April, 1915, in the Vermont Botanical Club's Flora 
of Vermont (the introduction signed: Ezra BRAINERD) the Wey- 
bridge shrub was listed (p. 215) without even a question as a perfectly 
valid species, “R. Brainerdi Rydb. (R. sativus Gray's Man,. ed. 
7)" But in the paper now before us the little Weybridge shrub, 
this time conceded to be neither R. pergratus nor a valid species, but 
merely an uncharacteristic and underdeveloped form of R. frondosus 
Bigelow, is given a full-page plate and a special page (33) of discussion 
as R. Brainerdi Rydberg (1913). 
The authors state that “ R. brainerdi Rydb. is a marked illustra- 
tion of the confusion which has existed in the taxonomic literature,” 
but it is obvious that the confusion is not wholly restricted to the 
literature. And, although the Weybridge shrub was one year “a 
distinct species," R. sativus, another year “a dwarf form of R. per- 
gratus," still later a valid species, R. Brainerdi, and at last report 
“a form of R. frondosus,” it is amazing that at no time has the way- 
ward plant been accused of being a hybrid! 
Since the name R. sativus Brainerd, which, when published in 
February, 1900, was a “name . . . . most appropriate," has 
now become objectionable, the following explanation is given: “ Brain- 
erd in a discussion of the plant to which Bailey had applied this 
varietal name [sativus] is accredited with the elevation of this variety 
to specific rank through a too liberal revision of his manuscript by 
the editors of Rnopona " (p. 33).4 
1Brainerd, Ruopora, ii. 26. 27 (1900). : 
?Brainerd, Jones & Eggleston, Flora of Vermont, 53 (1900). 
? Brainerd, Vt. Bot. Cl. Bull. no. 9, 15 (April, 1914). 
‘The actual passage reads somewhat strangely: ‘‘But based upon no definite 
type, Brainerd in a discussion,” etc. 
