FURTHER NOTES ON SCOTTISH ROSES 175 



of specimens with flowers and fruit, and asked him to give 

 his opinion regarding them. He very kindly examined 

 them and wrote me saying that in his opinion they belonged 

 to a little-known form, his variety incana, which is the same 

 as R. tomentosa, Sm., var. incana, Woods, and R. ccesia, Sm., 

 var. incana, Borrer. In confirmation of his opinion, he referred 

 me to Borrer's description in the " British Flora," ed. iii. p. 242, 

 and also to the type specimen in Woods' numbered collec- 

 tion, deposited in the Herbarium of the Linnean Society in 

 authentication of his monograph. 



Borrer's description of the var. incana does not agree 

 in several points with the characters of R. sub-coriifolia. As 

 regards the reflexion of the sepals, he says of var. incana : 

 " The sepals spread widely, or even become recurved after 

 flowering." In R. sub-coriifolia, the sepals become closely 

 reflexed (appressed to the fruit) after flowering. Some of 

 them spread a little just as the fruit is ripening, and rarely 

 one or two may become erect ; but on the whole they continue 

 closely reflexed till they drop off. Then as regards the fruit, 

 he describes that of var. incana as almost equally large at 

 both ends. The fruit of R. siib-coriifolia is almost always 

 thickest above the middle, and narrowed below. Knowing, 

 however, the difficulty of judging critical forms from even 

 the most accurate description, I was desirous to see the type 

 specimen in Woods' collection. A few months ago, a short 

 visit to London enabled me, through the kindness of the 

 officials of the Linnean Society, to gratify this desire. 



The specimen No. 59 of Woods' collection, named by 

 him var. incana of R. tomentosa, Sm., is rather a poor one on 

 which to found even a variety. It contains only one very 

 immature fruit. In the manuscript notes which are deposited 

 along with the collection Woods says : " Sent from Mr. G. 

 Don to Mr. Sabine. I have not only seen no other plant, 

 but this is the only specimen of the fruit which has come 

 under my notice." 



After a careful examination of the specimen, such as it 

 is, I am unable to coincide with Mr. Baker's opinion that var. 

 incana and R. sub-coriifolia are the same. Woods' plant ap- 

 pears to me to be certainly a form of R. coriifolia, Fr., belong- 

 ing to the same group as var. Watsoni, Baker. Borrer was, I 



