202 THE JOUJINAL OF BOTANY 



a leaf-bud is frequently seen, especially on the stronger branches. 

 In winter most of the leaves fall and the axillary spines, which 

 persist and become hard and rigid, then give the plant its familiar 

 prickly aspect. In early spring the leaf-buds under the spines begin 

 to grow, those towards the apex of the branches generally developing 

 into short Howering stems, densely leafy but spineless, while others 

 grow into longer branches to continue the existence of the plant. 



The Scotch spineless form, as I have seen it, is invariably prostrate, 

 and shows no deviation towards the type. On an average, it is 

 somewhat slenderer, but it produces stems as much as a foot long, 

 and its leaves, which are very glaucous at Clova, are fully of normal 

 size. The axillar}^ spines are never fully developed, and are more 

 often than not entirely absent. When present, they are suberect and 

 scarcely half as long as the subtending leaves, being only 2-4 mm. in 

 len'Hh. Thev are, indeed, little more than bristles, and are equalled 

 or even exceeded by their bracts. Frequently a tuft of bracts alone 

 appears in the axit without any spine whatever ; and such spines as 

 are formed are almost uniformly deciduous with the leaves, so that 

 the older parts of the stems are spineless and naked. I can find no 

 ti-ace of the characteristic leaf-buds below any of the spines, and fresh 

 branches are apparently developed from the occasional tufts of axillary 

 bracts. In my expenence a much smaller proportion of liowering 

 branches is produced than in the type, and the number of flowers 

 rarely exceeds six on any one branch. In one of my specimens, 

 contrary to what might be expected, the leaves of a flowering branch 

 show a few of the small bristle-like spines. 



I can find no material of this peculiar form in the European 

 collection at South Kensington, but three British examples there 

 probablv belong to it, viz. : — A. Somerville, Kincraig, Easterness, 

 1891 ; E. S. MarsliaU, Tomintoul, Banff, 1905 ; A. Lei/, Rhosgoch 

 Boo-, Radnor, 1885. A slight degree of doubt attaches to these 

 specimens, as they may possibly have been taken from exceptionally 

 weak individual plants and not be really representative. 



The only allusion to a plant of this kind that I can find in British 

 Floras is in Babington's Manual, ed. 9, p. 87, where, in the specific 

 diagnosis of G. anglica, the stem is stated to be " sometimes quite 

 prostrate." 



In Rouy k Foucaud's Flore de France, iv. p. 227 (1897), there 

 is, under G. anglica L., a variety /3 suhinermis, which shows the 

 special features of the Scotch form. This variety is founded on 

 G. anglica sub-var. siiline-rmisliQ Grand, Fl. Berry, ed. 2, p. 70 (1894), 

 and is diagnosed "Tiges basses, plus ou moins couchees; epines faibles 

 et rares, ou presque nuUes. — Cher, marais tourbeux de Nancay 

 (Le Grand).'" I have been unable to consult the second edition of 

 Le Grand's Flora for his original description, but that given by 

 Eouv & Foucaud, so far as it goes, fits our plant exactly except for 

 the habitat, which appears to be wetter than the Scotch stations 

 that I have seen. The essential character of a prostrate habit in 

 combination with practically spineless stems is evidently common 

 to the Scotch and the French plants, and constitutes a remarkable 



