26 A LIST OF BRITISH ROSES 



[B. Burnati Chr. ex Burn. & Grem. Eos. Alp. p. 92. I have 

 not seen any of Christ's specimens, but by description the only 

 tangible differences from B. incerta are the long arcuate, not stout 

 hooked prickles, and the more villous styles. 1 have eight or nine 

 examples, all from Cheshire, referred to this species by Sudre. 

 Dingier has only seen one of these, which he says " cannot be 

 Burnati," but does not say why. Almost all have glabrous or 

 subglabrous styles, and many have quite short but arcuate prickles ; 

 the sepals are usually spreading or even somewhat ascending, and 

 the fruit subglobose. One or two have the arcuate prickles of 

 B. Burnati, but not the villous styles. Many of my specimens 

 agree very well with B. Deseglisei in their prickles, subglobose 

 fruit, very spreading sepals, and thinly hispid styles, but their 

 leaflets are much more glabrous. For the present I exclude this 

 species in favour of the older B. mcerta, though my specimens 

 agree well with neither.] 



[B. imitata Desegl. in Mem. Soc. Maine & Loire, xxviii. p. 120. 

 This species differs from B. incerta, of which it has the thinly 

 hairy leaflets and stout hooked prickles, mainly in its pyriform 

 fruit, narrowed into the peduncle ; its leaflets also are uniformly 

 simply serrate, and its flowers white. I have nothing with such 

 fruit, but two specimens from Hereford {Ley) are thought by 

 Dingier to be a new variety near it. They dili'er chiefly in their 

 elongate ellipsoid fruit, narrowed at the apex rather than at the 

 base, and in their subglabrous, not hispid styles. Sudre thought 

 them near B. Burnati, and they are much like a French example 

 he has sent me so named, but this has quite an obovoid-ellipsoid 

 calyx-tube, as well as the prickles and uniform serration of 

 B. imitata.] 



[B. trichoidea Eip. ex Desegl. Cat. Eais. p. 217. The Stoughton, 

 Leicester, plant {Honoood) sent to the Watson Exchange Club as 

 B. tomentosa var. scabriuscula (see Eept. 1906-7, p. 89), belongs 

 here, I think, but its fruit, besides being hardly elongate enough, 

 is glandular-hispid, so I hardly like to add the name to our list 

 without confirmation. The specimen must at least fall under an 

 aggregate B. Deseglisei, but besides the hispid fruit, it has un- 

 usually hispid peduncles for the segregate. It is, however, possible 

 that it is a Tomentosa form, as at first supposed, but nearer 

 B. dwnosa Pug. than B. scabriuscula Sm.] 



E. coLLiNA Jacq. Fl. Austr. ii. p. 58. I have seen no specimens 

 referred to this species beyond those mentioned in E. pp. 81, 82. 

 I leave it in this subgroup for the present, but it is doubtful 

 whether it is its proper place. V.-c. 2. 



[B. Kosinciana auct. angl. (Baker, Monogr. p. 232). The only 

 specimen I possess of this, from the Isle of Wight {E. F. Linton), 

 looks very different from anything in this group in its finely, quite 

 simply serrate, lanceolate-elliptical leaflets, very broadly rounded 

 at base, and only very thinly hairy on the midribs, and in its 

 perfectly globose fruit. It will not do for B. collina Jacq., though 

 at present I cannot find a name for it.] 



