144 NOTES ON RUBI. 



he x'laces ouly one sj)ecies, B. Lejeunii, Bor. = E. ])UntJiosti/lus, 

 Genev., between R. mutahilis, Grenev., and U. Lejeunii, W. & N. 

 It is true that he removes li. dirersifolim, Lindl., far away from 

 them, considering it to be one of the Ccesii. In this view of 

 R. (livemfolim I cannot agree with him, although Mr. Baker 

 manifestly does so. Dr. Focke also j)laces a part of my R. diversi- 

 foHns (that form figured in this journal, viii., t. 107) amongst the 

 CcBsii, under the name of R. myriacanthus, Focke. As that name 

 was only published in 1871, and Lmdley's R. diversifolius in 1835, 

 Focke manifestly considers the typical form of Lmdley's i>lant as 

 distinct, although I do not find any notice of it in his book. My 

 opmion is that R. diversifoUiis and R. Lejeunii are more coiTectly 

 placed in the group Koehleriani. 



R. mutabilis difiers from 7?. diversifolius by having traces of 

 glaucous bloom on the barren stem, an obovate-acuminate terminal 

 leaflet, stalked and not imbricate basal leaflets, a long pyramidal 

 panicle with much longer axillary subcorymbose branches and 

 unequal setae. From R. Lejeunii, by the bloom on the much more 

 prickly stem, on which the prickles are more unequal and the 

 aciculi not so distinct from them, the leaves rugose above and 

 very much more liauy or even felted beneath. The panicle is 

 narrower, its axillary branches somewdiat compound, the branch 

 and its branchlets being nearly corymbose, its prickles very strong 

 and much more abundant, and springing from long, narrow, com- 

 pressed bases. Also, Mr. Briggs states that Imear, but sometimes 

 slightly leaf-lilve, ^Doints to the sej^als may be found. 



Folio whig the i^lan adopted in my 'Manual,' I should thus 

 characterise the plant, and place it between my R. diversifolius and 

 R. Lejeunii : — 



R. Dnitahilis, Genev.; stem arcuate-prostrate angular sparingly 

 pilose and setose, prickles moderate unequal sub-patent 

 from a long compressed base, aciculi strong very unequal 

 mostly short, leaflets rugose above doubly and mostly 

 lobate-dentate very densely haky or felted beneath, 

 terminal leaflet obovate-acunmiate, basal leaflets stalked, not 

 imbricate ; imnicle long narrou -pyramidal leafy nearly to 

 the top its branches and branchlets subcorymbose subpatent, 

 its rachis rery pricJdy aciculate and setose its prickles very 

 strong from large compressed bases numerous, sepals 

 ovate felted setose reflexed with rather leaf-like points. — 

 R. obliquus, Blox., not Wirtg. — Stem often with glaucous 

 bloom. "Petals greenish- white. Filaments white. Styles 

 greenish." — Abundant near Plymouth. 



12. R. cAVATiFOLius, Miill. — The Rev. Augustin Ley has sent 

 me a very interesting bramble found near Trellech, Monmouthshire, 

 in August, 1876, which is very near R. pallidus, but probably is 

 the R. caratifoUus, Miill., as published in Boulay's ' Ronces Vos- 

 giennes,' pp. 67 and 132, sp. 49.) It agrees very well with the 

 Abbe Boulay's description, and my specimen is exceedingly like 

 those from France. R. cavatifolius is not noticed by Focke in his 



