48 ON THE EUBI LIST IN 'LONDON CATALOGUE.' 



E. LATiFOLius Bab. 6 v.-c. (35, 52, 83, 84, 88, 97). [89]. 

 B. E. C. Bep. 1893, 406. 



Dr. Focke tells me that he has seen no British B. ammobius 

 Focke. He considers the Perth plant so named by Prof. Babington 

 to be a form of B. iiitidus. 



K. iMBRicATUs Hort. No. in Set, 8. 11 v.-c. (2-5, 9, 10, 17, 22, 

 34-36). 



E. cAKPiNiFOLius W. & N. No. in Set, 28. 28 v.-c. (3, 5. 6, 8, 

 9, 11, 12, 16, 17, 21, 22, 34-36, 38-40, 42, 43, 49, 55, 57, 62, 63, 

 97, 98, 103, 105). [15, 41] . I. 



I omit B. stevophj/lliis P. J. Mnell. (described as a var. of B. 

 carpinifoHus in my Essay, Journ. Bot. 1892, 143) and B. montamis 

 Wirtg., as being too doubtfully British. 



E. iNcuRVATus Bab. No. in Set, 7. 20 v.-c. (4, 9, 13, 17, 22, 

 36, 45, 46, 48-52, 57, 60, 71, 76, "Perth," 105, 110). I. 



E. LiNDLEiANUs Lccs. No. in Set, 29. 64 v.-c. (2-12, 15-18, 

 20-28, 31, 32, 34-43, 45, 46, 48, 49, 50, 52, 55-66, 69-72, 74, 76, 

 86, 87, 99, 100). A very wide-spread constant species, probably 

 absent from very few of our vice-counties. I. 



E. ERYTHRiMus Gcncv. No. in Set, 58 (exclusive of the speci- 

 mens so numbered from "Bailie Gate, Dorset," which prove to be 

 B. Questieru Lefvr. & Muell.). 16 v.-c. (2-7, 9, 11, 17, 25, 34-36, 

 40, 41, 49). B. arqenteus W. & N. is omitted as too uncertain. 



E. DURESCENS W. E. Lintou. No. in Set, 57. 1 v.-c. (57). 



E. RHAMNiFOLius W. & N. (sp. collect.), Jouni. Bat. 1890, 101. 

 61 v.-c. (1-12, 14-19, 21-28, 32-40, 42, 46, 48-52, 54-58, 62-64, 

 69-71, 73, 74, 85, 88, 92, 95, 97, 98). I. Now that Dr. Focke has 

 seen more of our plant in various parts of England, he considers it 

 a well-marked form, not identical with his var. stenoplos, though 

 nearer to it than to the type (his " germajiiciis"). He sees no 

 occasion for giving it a varietal name, and says (in litt., Dec. 1893), 

 "It will be impossible to name every single form of the aggregate 

 rhamnifolius." 



E. NEMORALis P. J, Mucll. Jouni. Bot. 1894, 42. No. in Set, 

 56. 4 v.-c. (1, 9, 11, 36). Will surely be found in other counties. 



Var. b. (jlahratus Bab. (as var. of B. macrophi/llus in Lnnd. Cat. 

 ed. 8), Joum. But. 1894, 43. No. in Set, 34. 6 v.-c. (34, 36, 38, 

 46, 48, 49). [23, 86] . 



Var. c. Silimmi A. Ley, Jouni. Bot. 1894, 142. 9 v.-c. (6, 34, 

 36, 42-44, 46, 47, 49). 



E. puLCHERRiMUS Neuman. B. polyanthemosljmdeh. " B. Maassii 

 Focke," Bond. Cat. ed. 8. Joum. Bot'. 1890, 102, 131, 166. Inclusive 

 of the white-flowered eglandular form provisionally separated from 

 it as "i?. / diimosus Lefv." in my Essay, Jouni. Bot. 1892, 114, and 

 also of the " B. MuenterV Auct. Brit. No. in Set, 54. 49 v.-c. 

 (2-18, 21-23, 25-28, 34-36, 38-40, 43, 49, 52, 55-58, 61-63, 65, 

 69, 70, 73, 97, 98, 103, 105, 110). [74] . I. Locally most abun- 

 dant, especially on sandy commons in the south, and probably 

 altogether absent from very few counties. The chief constituent in 

 our old "ii. umbrosus Arrh." I still leave under it (with the MS. 

 name of var. setosus suggested by the Eev. A. Ley) a beautiful 



