84 

 SHOET NOTES. 



Distribution of Ulex.eu-nanus in England. — In the notice of 

 the Bot. Eecord Club Eeport for 1877 ip. 63), the occurrence of 

 restricted U. nanus in South Hampshire api)ears to be questioned. 

 This induces me to forward for critical inspection the Eecord 

 Club specimen so named, gathered by E. D, Marquand, and localised 

 as from "Brockenhurst.'' Permit me to j)oint out that this is not 

 the first report of the i)lant for the vice-county in question ; in 

 ' To^Dographical Botany ' (part ii., ]d. 609) the Vlex eu-namis of Syme 

 is recorded for South Hants on the excellent *' personal authority" 

 of Mr. Frederick Townsend. Mr. Marquand adds, in a recent 

 letter to the writer, that he finds " U. Gallii comparatively rare 

 on the heaths about Sway, Brockenhurst and Beaulieu plain, 

 where U. eii-nanus is very abundant." My experience in North and 

 Mid England is the reverse, but I, nevertheless, know the 

 dwarf eu-nanus in S.W. Yorks., S. Stafford and also N. Lincoln. 

 I send specimen from the race -course at Doncaster, and from a 

 warren near Gainsborough. The plant in the former locality is 

 dwarfed, unhealthy, and likely to be extirpated ; in the Gamsborough 

 station it attains a large size and is perhaps too near Gallit, — as to 

 this Dr. Trimen will, jDcrhaps, kindly express his opinion. I have 

 in former years found U. eu-nanus in Glamorgan and South Stafford, 

 so that its distribution is pretty wide horizontally ; although every- 

 where, so far as my experience goes, local, and much less plentiful 

 as regards number of individual plants than U. Gallii. Here, near 

 Easen, U. Gallii is the only Whin on the sandy heaths of the 

 Greensand stratum. — F. A. Lees. 



Ulex nanus in South Hants. — In answer to the enquiry con- 

 tained in the notice of the Eeport of the Bot. Eecord Club in the 

 last No. of the ' Journal of Botany' (p. 63), " Does restricted JJlex 

 nanus occur in South Hampshire?" I find I have recorded it on 

 personal authority for the following stations; — Bournemouth; 

 Eingwood ; Burley ; Lyndhurst ; Holmsley ; Beaulieu ; Eomsey ; 

 Miller's Pond, near Southton ; Fisher's Pond, between Owlesbury 

 and Bishopstoke ; Shedfield ; Botley ; Titchfield Common ; South - 

 wick Common ; (in these last three neighbourhoods it is more 

 frequent than U. europceus). I have it recorded by other botanists 

 (exclusive of Dr. Bromfield and Mr. Notcutt, who may not have 

 distinguished it fi-om U. Gallii) from thirteen other localities in 

 South Hants. I have only two records of Ulex Gallii, viz., 

 Bournemouth and the Lymington district. — F. Townsend. 



Ulex nanus in South Hants. — AU doubt as to the occurrence 

 of U. eu-nanus in South Hants is very completely done away 

 with. What is more sur2)rising to me is to find it apparently 

 so very frequent a plant there. My query at p. 63 was based 

 on my remembrance of the great heath-district of South- 

 west Hants (and Dorset), where U. Gallii occurs in profusion. 



