THE BOTANY OF THE MAROCCAN MIDDLE ATLAS 101 



1915, p. 72, plate ; Battandier, Contrib. FL Atlant. p. 25) is another 

 remarkably tine plant with drooping racemes of large flowers and 

 silvery leaves, of which no specimen seems to have existed in this 

 country up to the present time. Captain Lynes informs me that it 

 grows among the cedars and springs up in great quantities where 

 there has been a clearing or after a fire. 



Erythrcea major Hoffm. & Link is a plant of the type of E. ramo- 

 sissima Pers., but is distinguished by the larger, deeper-coloured 

 flowers, with a longer corolla tube and more deeply-divided limb with 

 acute segments. The anthers are exserted, and after dehiscence 

 contract into a very elegant spiral coil. 



Veronica ? rosea Desf. I have seen no specimen, and suggest 

 the name with some diffidence ; but judging from the description the 

 plant appears to correspond very closely to what Battandier and 

 Trabut understand by V. rosea. 



BRITISH RUBI, 1900-1920. 

 By THE Rev. H. J. Riddelsdell. 



This paper is an attempt to summarize the changes in our ideas 

 about Ruhus (in Britain) which have taken place since Mr. Rogers 

 published his Handbook.' In the majority of cases, the changes are 

 directly due — so far as English botanists are concerned — to his work ; 

 the remainder have always been made under his guidance and with 

 his consent. 



My aim is simply to reduce these changes, most of which find 

 their record in this Journal, to convenient shajje for M'orking purposes. 

 Mr. Rogers some months ago kindly expressed complete approval of 

 the plan, and indeed lent me his interleaved Handbook, which con- 

 tains all the material and references here grouped. The paper, there- 

 fore, does nothing more than mention new forms, revisions of nomen- 

 clature and arrangement, corrections in description, and the like, 

 belonging to the last twenty years. The distribution question is 

 hardly touched. The tenth edition of the London Catalogiie, of 

 course, marks a stage in the process of development which is here 

 sketched. There is nothing original in the paper, but it is hoped 

 that it may enable workers in JRubus — now, alas, too few ! — to carry 

 on with greater ease. 



The numbers referred to are those of the Handbook : any number 

 followed by " a " indicate a species not in the Handbook and the 

 position which it should hold in the list : — 



6. R. plicatus Wh. & N. var. he7nistemon {(jenQY.)=:pseudo- 

 liemistemon Focke. Journ. Bot. 1905, pp. 73, 199. 



7. R. JsriTiDUS Wh. & N. subsp. opacus Focke becomes a full 

 species. Journ. Bot. 1914, p. 180. In the description of sepals delete 

 " greyish-green.'''' 



9. For R. integribasis P. J. Muell. read R. c^eesiensis Sudre 

 & Gravet var. integribasis Rogers (non P. J. Muell. ?). Journ. Bot. 

 1914, p. 179. 



