24 SHOUT NOTES. 



note, " This will not do for R. vin/inea, wkicli has glabrous 

 peduncles." M. Crepin has now confirmed this view. He says 

 further that he has no rose in his herbarium identical with this ; 

 and, suggesting for it as a new variety the name pseudo-ruHticana, 

 he points out that it differs from rusticana in the following 

 particulars: — Its corolla pure white, instead of pink [hlanc-carnc), 

 its style-column longer and slendei-er, and its leaflets longer, more 

 acuminate, and with broader teeth. It may be thus described : — 



liosa pseudo-rust icana Crep. — Bush strong, with very elongate 

 arcuate-prostrate branches. Prickles few (quite wanting on some 

 stems), siistyla-like, but longer-pointed. Leaflets us lally quite 

 glabrous, though occasionally having a few hairs along the midrib 

 beneath, pale green, very unequal, strongly acuminate, and with 

 unequal (often very unequal) strongly acuminate simple serrations ; 

 often tinged with red. Petioles usually rather hairy, with a few 

 small prickles and setae. Stipules and bracts i-emarkably acuminate, 

 fringed irregularly with hairs and setae, but otherwise glabrous, 

 often tinged with red. Corolla cup-shaped, pure white. Sepals as 

 strongly pinnate as in systt/ht. Style-column on very prominent 

 disk, and so made about level with the stamens, though actuijilly 

 shorter. Peduncles always well clothed with unequal setcns, usually 

 shorter than in si/stijhi, though longer than in average canina forms. 

 — This easily-recognised rose is frequent on hedges on the western 

 slope of Haldon, Teign Valley, S. Devon, where I showed it to Mr. 

 ]3riggs, who afterwards sent it to me from Doddiscombsleigh (a 

 little farther north), and from Torquay. In 1884, 1 also found it at 

 Leigh and Bailey Kidge, Dorset, where I saw it again last summer. 

 My son and I then found it also at Beer Hackett (north of Leigh), 

 and immediately after at Hagler's Hole, S. Wilts. I know no other 

 localities. — W. Moyle Piogers. 



Arum italicum Mill. — I should like to add my testimony to 

 that of Mr. T. R. Archer Briggs, in his very interesting remarks in 

 this Journal, 1888, p. 378, with reference to this plant. I have had 

 the plant (the roots originally brought from Steephill) in my 

 garden for just twenty years. On the 31st May, 1809, I made the 

 following note : — "Of the roots placed in my garden in June, 1868, 

 the plant in the warmest and most open situation was the earliest 

 in flower. The spathe is now fully open. The spathe in the other 

 plants, which are more in the shade, are fully formed, but are not 

 opened." On the 9th of June, " The spathe of a plant in the shade 

 on the north side of a wall was fully opened this morning." I am 

 Borry that I have no records in later years of the time of flowering 

 in my garden, but I believe that the spathes are seldom fully 

 expanded until the second week in June. At Steephill, there were 

 spathes fully open on the 17th June, 1808 ; none on the 3rd May, 

 1870. In Jersey, in the last week in April, 1871, I believe there 

 were no spathes showing — at least, I do not remember seeing any ; 

 and my herbarium specimens collected there at that time are 

 leaves only. In the first record of the occurrence of the plant in 

 ]>ritain (Phyt. v. 194), Mr. Hambrough states that it " produces its 

 flowers in Jane." With regard to the fli-st appearance of the 



