GERANIUM PUBPUBEUM 97 



states that Borrer " has also lately observed it (the var. Forsteri) 

 in Dillenius's station," and since we know that Borrer knew Forster's 

 plant apart from G. Robertiamim var. maritimum (" the Shoreham 

 one") we may be justified in assuming that Dillenius's plant was 

 the var. Forsteri, although 1 found no voucher specimen in Herb. 

 Borrer. Will some botanist make a careful search for it there ? 



1 have searched the Sloane Herbarium for evidence, but without 

 success. The Bay name is attached to a water-colour sketch (no. 133) 

 bv Ehret (fl. 1740-70) in the Department of Botany, but as the 

 ori° - in of the specimen is not given it may be here ignored, although 

 I have not seen a Herb Robert which would exactly match it. The 

 Bay name is also to be found in the Solander MSS. as a synonym of 

 " G. saxatile " from " in rupibus Scti. Vincentis prope Bristol and in 

 collibus maritimis Anglian, Alchorne." The " tota planta glabra " 

 indicates that the St. Vincent's Rocks plant was probably the peculiar 

 glabrous limestone form of G. Robertiamim which occurs at Cheddar 

 (K. S. Marshall, no. 3910, see B. E. C. 1913, Rep. 402, &c.) and in 

 Derbyshire, which has at times been wrongly named purpureum and 

 modestum. The Alchorne maritime plant would be the var. maritimiim, 

 s^ ith which the glabrous limestone form is almost identical except in 

 its very slightly hairy fruits. It should be mentioned that normally 

 1 airy forms also occur on the limestone screes in Somerset and 

 Der rvshire. The glabrous form requires further study. 



It is possible that the Raian name may refer to G. Raii Lindley 

 (Syn. 57 : 1829) should there be a distinct form corresponding to that 

 name ! Lindley's meagre description, placed between G. Robertiamim 

 and G. hicidum is " stalks 2-rlowered, shaggy. Fruit wrinkled, 

 simply keeled .... (Ray synon.). On the sea-coast in the South of 

 England. Annual, June, July." The statement that the stalks and 

 calyx were shaggy would appear to indicate Forster's plant (N.B. : the 

 " calyx with 10 angles " and " fruit wrinkled " may be ignored, as 

 G. Robertiamim is similarly described). But G. Raii cannot be 

 G. purpureum Forster, since both at Cambridge (Herb. Henslow) and 

 at Kew are plants labelled by Lindley " G. purpureum Eng. Bot. nee 

 G. Raianum, Lindl. Synops.," from the "Sussex coast," "Lindley, 

 1830." These are, indeed, G.purpure'um Forster, although Prof I Moss 

 has erroneously labelled both of them G. Robertiamim var. inariti- 

 mum Bab. Unfortunately Lindley appears to have left no specimen 

 to show what actually teas his plant. 



It is just possible that Lindley may have intended the form which 

 I long grew in my garden from the shore E. of Pevenst^. This has 

 glabrous carpels like the Shoreham form, but the pedicels and calyx 

 are glandular hairy, the calyx densely so (though scarcely "shaggy"). 

 The flowers in some herbarium specimens are often small, as in var. 

 maritimum : after several years* cultivation in my garden the flowers 

 were as large as in the typical form, but I have no notes as to their 

 size on the original parents. The anthers of the plant in my garden 

 were a yellower (less red) orange than the type, and the carpophore 

 extremely stout (1*5 mm. instead of 1*0 mm.), but this latter character 

 has not been noticed on herbarium specimens of this form. It is the 

 G. Robertiamim var. modestum of Arnold's Fl. Sussex, ed. 2, 24 (1907),, 



