igo ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY 



R. saxicolus, P. J. Mueller (R, humifusus, Bab.). This has 

 been confused in the past with both R. pallidus, Bab., and 

 R. pallidns, W. and N. ; and we are not certain to this day 

 that the form which remained as a residuary legatee of the 

 name is rightly identified with Mueller's plant. 



R. foliosus, W. and N., var. adornatus, Bab. This is the 

 plant which Professor Babington is quoted (under R. Lcjcnnii} 

 by Mr. Brown as uniting with his R. Lejctmii and festivus 

 and with R. Fuckdii, Wirtg. (p. 1 12). As in the case of R. 

 Lejeunii, so here, it must be borne in mind that the name 

 R. foliosus, W. and N., has for some decades been misapplied. 

 R. foliosus, W. and N., is what we have known as R. flexuosus, 

 Muell. and Lefv. ; and R. Guentheri, Bab., R. foliosus, Blox., 

 Bab., etc., is R. adornatus, P. J. Muell., and R. atrorubens, 

 Wirtg., var. aculeatissimus ; also R. exsecatus, Mueller and 

 Wirtg. Our British form is more strongly armed than type 

 adornatus, but otherwise there is little difference ; and there- 

 fore it stands in our list under this name. 



R. pendulinus, P. J. Mueller. Mr. Rogers tells me that 

 this rested for Britain on three gatherings which are represented 

 in the Cambridge Herbarium, viz. : from near Haslemere, 

 Surrey ; Mousehold Heath, Norwich ; and Polstead, Suffolk. 

 The Suffolk plant seemed to Mr. Rogers different from the 

 other two, and more like a form of R. foliosus ; the Mouse- 

 hold Heath plant can be no other than one that I regard 

 as the open heath form of R. tereticaulis, P. J. Muell., an 

 opinion to which Mr. Rogers has assented. Under these 

 circumstances R. pcndidinus drops out of the list till further 

 evidence can be found of its occurrence in Britain. 



R. Reuteri, Merc. The plant referred to under this 

 name was "R. Reuteri, Merc.," fide Professor Babington (" Bot. 

 Exch. Club Rept, 1882-87, passim} ; R. rubicundus, Wirtg. 

 (ditto. 1888-89); R. obscurus, Kalt. (ditto. 1889? 1890)- 

 both Professor Babington and Dr. Focke at that date giving 

 this name to it. In 1894 Dr. Focke saw the plant growing, 

 and revoked his former naming ; and this year it reappears 

 (" Journ. Bot," 1895, p. 102) as R. rosaceus, W. and N., nov. 

 var. Purchasianus, Rogers. It is given by Mr. Rogers (I.e.} for 

 Kincardine and South Aberdeen, and six English vice-counties. 



