466 THE SALIX LISTS IN THE 'LONDON CATALOGUE.' 



1399 cinerea L. Smith's two varieties aquatica and oleifolia 

 are no more than leaf-i'orms connected with the type by inter- 

 mediates ; tlie names may be of use both for the garden and the 

 herbarimn, as an aid to classification of the forms of a very variable 

 willow, but they do not represent distinct varieties ; and on this 

 ground were omitted by Dr. White. It has been suggested that 

 these two represent hybrids of anrita; it is not the case, however, 

 that all "aquatica" is aurita and Caprea, nor that all oleifolia Sm. 

 is aurita x cinerea, as has been suggested. After deducting what 

 may rightly go to these hybrids, there still remains a residuum in 

 each case of pure cinerea forms. 



1401 Caprea x cinerea. I am still unable to give a satisfactory 

 account of the distribution of this hybrid. It is apparently ex- 

 ceedingly scarce, and hard to detect even in localities where both 

 species occur together. A plant cultivated at Kew as 8. moschata 

 would seem to be it ; but the plant formerly cultivated there as 

 8. sjiliacelata was in my opinion S. aurita x Ca]>rea rather than this 

 hybrid. A Derbyshire form of it is issued as No. 55, Set of British 

 Willows. 



1402 repens. The varieties of S. repens admitted in former 

 editions of the Catalogue can only be regarded as forms of little 

 constancy (see introductory remarks to the third fascicle of British 

 Willows) ; and do not cover half the forms which this species pro- 

 duces in Britain. The only familiar form which is a good variety 

 is S. rosiiiarinifolia L., and that is perhaps rather a subspecies ; 

 while the proof of its occurrence in Britain is not forthcoming, 



1402 repens X Caprea [Caprea-repens Lasch.). Published by 

 Dr. White for Britain {Joum.Linn.Soc. xxvii. 394) on our Armadale 

 specimens, but I have never agreed to this naming; and now after 

 years of cultivation (at Shirley), and after seeing Scandinavian 

 specimens of Caprea x repens and. cinerea x repens, I am sure that 

 my view is correct, that the plant is 8. cinerea x repens. This 

 latter hybrid comes also from the Clova Valley, but not from 

 Holme Feu, as Dr. White thought on specimens of the Rev. W. R. 

 Linton's or mine in Mr. A. Bennett's herbarium. I have also a leaf- 

 specimen, probably of this, received from Dr. Mason, origin unknown. 

 We have, however, no .S'. Caprea x repens for Britain as yet. 



1403 p)hiiLicifolia x aurita {S. Indijicans F. B. White). The 

 account of the Pertbshire bushes on which S. indijicans was founded 

 leaves room for grave suspicion whether any of them were S. aurita 

 X phylicifolia. I have come across several such bushes, with foliage 

 much on the plujlicifolia side, and anrita suggested by the pubescence 

 and shape of the leaf, and it may be an abbreviated style. Culti- 

 vation, however, in two such cases disposed of the pubescence, and 

 has shown the plant to be 8. plujlicifolia. The most promising 

 Perthshire plant died. The most satisfactory Forfarshire plant is 

 issued as No. 59, Set of British Willows. There is in all probability 

 some strain of aurita in this last ; but Dumfriesshire plants, of 

 which Mr. James Fingland has kindly furnished me with cuttings 

 and specimens, which are admirably intermediate, show how much 

 wanting in evidence of aurita the Perthshire Indijicans is. All such 



