116 



NOTES ON RUBI. 



describe, a plaut which he states to be prevalent in some parts of 

 Cheshire, and calls U. festivus, Wirtg. I have now had the loan 

 for a short time of two specimens from Yorkshire which he 

 authenticated as his R. festivii.s. Apparently there is no notice of 

 this plant as a British native since that given by Mr. Warren in 

 1869, nor mitil now (October, 1877) have any specimens of it 

 passed through my hands. These belong, and are returned to. Dr. 

 F. A. Lees. They were gathered, I believe, near Sheffield. But 

 I received what is probably the same plant from Mr. Edwin Lees 

 many years since as a form of R. (riintheri. He found it in Harts- 

 hill Wood, Warwickshire. 



I think that Mr. Warren is correct in considering the speci- 

 mens from Yorkslm-e to be R. festivus, Miill. & Wirtg. Foreign 

 exami)les are in 'Wirtg. Herb. Kub.' (ed. 1, fasc. v., no. 138; fasc. 

 vi., nos. 176, 177 ; and ed. 2, fasc. ii., no. 07). The followmg 

 character of it as a species will be found on the tickets of nos. 138 

 and 67 : " Caule arcuato subtereto piloso sparsim glauduloso [i.e., 

 setoso] et aciculato, aculeis brevibus subaequalibus reclinatis, foliis 

 quinatis et ternatis obovatis simpliciter grosse dentatis supra 

 glabris subtus pauce pilosis, panicula longa subflexosa foliosa 

 ramosa, ramis 3-5-floris, calycibus reflexis, sepalis longe acumi- 

 natis, petalis rosaceis ovatis." It will be seen that this description 

 ssays, "foliis .... simpliciter grosse dentatis," but that character 

 is not found on the accompanying specimens, which I should 

 describe as having "foliis minute subduplicato dentatis." But 

 perhaps the authors had in view the leaves of the flowering shoot 

 to which their character is more applicable, although even there I 

 find a double dentition. Focke (* Syn.,' 314) says of the leaves: 

 " in^qualiter argute serrata." One of the Yorkshire specimens is 

 rather coarsely dentate, but the other is minutely and doubly 

 dentate, and very finely and elegantly so edged. 



Mr. Warren seems to consider this plant as one of the Glandulosi. 

 I have placed it with the SpectahUcs ; for Mr. E. Lees's j)lant chiefly 

 differs from 11. mucromdatUH by having doubly dentate and thinner 

 leaves, probably caused hj growing in shade. Some of my speci- 

 mens from Hartshill Wood, for which I am indebted to Mr. Bloxam, 

 and which he called the //. sijlraticiis of Leighton's ' Fasciculus,' 

 are very nearly the typical R. mucnmnlatus ; whilst Mr. Lees's 

 specimens, to which the same name is quoted, arc very nearly the 

 same as those called JL festirm by Warren, and ai)proacli those 

 published as R'.festicus by Wii'tgen. 



On the whole, my impression is that we are fully justified in 

 placing the British //. festirits under //. iimcronulatm. 



7. E. RUBicoLOR, ])l(>j'. This is placed as synonymous with R. 

 Sprcni/f'lii in the ' Student's Flora.' Before doing so, I presume 

 that Mr. Baker had seen better specimens of it than the flowering 

 shoot which alone I find in my copy of Mr. Bloxam's recently- 

 issued ' Set.' Genevier (1. c, 196) ajDpears to have seen only very 

 imperfect specimens. He places it close to our 11. Sprem/cUi, which 

 he conibmes with it. neiiiocharis, Miill. I have not seen the barren 



