28 A LIST OF BRITISH ROSES 



been worked up, four subdivisions might be made from a combi- 

 nation of eacli of the two indicated. As they stand at present, 

 each of the following names includes examples differing widely 

 from one another in size and shape of leaflets and fruit. 



Leaflets Uniserrate. 



R. Reuteri God. ex Rent. Cat. Gen^v. ed. 2, p. 68. Uniserrate 

 leaflets and smooth peduncles suffice to distinguish this from its 

 British allies. I have very little material of it. A form with 

 white flowers occurs near Killin [Barclay), which has also very 

 spreading sepals, so that it is quite as near the Subcanince 

 subgroup. V.-c. 16, 34, 43, 58, 59, 62, 65, 67, 88. 



[B. Crepiniana Desegl. ex Baker, Rev. p. 28. I feel sure that 

 this is only a synonym of B. Beuteri. Deseglise himself made 

 but slight differences (see E. p. 91). Crepin mentions them 

 separately, but without any definition, in his Prim. Monogr., but 

 only gives B. Grepiniana in his later Tabl. Analyt., meaning pre- 

 sumably to include B. Beuteri, in spite of the latter being the 

 older name. If there is any difference, it lies in the more ovoid 

 fruit of B. Grepiniana. I have no specimen except from the 

 original bush at Chelsfield, W. Kent.] 



R. intricata Gren. Rev. Fl. Jur. p. 64. Glandular peduncles 

 form the distinguishing feature of this from B. Beuteri. I con- 

 tine the name to examples with quite or very nearly simple serra- 

 tion, referring the irregularly serrate ones to B. fugax Gren. 

 This reduces my specimens to three. Sudre has only seen one, 

 froiii Cheshire, which he labels B. glauca var. suhcuneata Rouy. 

 Dingier also thinks it agrees with that variety in Rouy's key, but 

 does not know it. For the present I prefer to keep it as B. intri- 

 cata. V.-c. 40, 58, 98. 



[B. glauca var. suhcuneata Rouy. Fl. Fr. vi. p. 321. This name 

 is applied by Sudre to three of my specimens, viz., the original 

 Chelsfield B. Grepiniana, the Cheshire B. intricata mentioned 

 above, and a somewhat biserrate form of the latter from Hereford 

 {Ley), which I refer to B. fugax. The three can hardly go 

 together, and as I know nothing else of the variety I exclude it.] 



Leaflets Biserrate. 



R. suBCRiSTATA Baker, Rev. p. 29. I take this name as an 

 older one than B. compUcata Gren., and thinly that the two should 

 be regarded as synonymous, as most authors do. Specimens I 

 have referred here vary greatly. One from Buckie Braes, Perth 

 {Barclay), has globose fruit, while another from the same station 

 and collector has it remarkably elongate-obovoid. A Radnor speci- 

 men has all the appearance of typical B. anclegavensis but the 

 group characters of B. glauca. My Hereford and Cheshire speci- 

 mens differ considerably from these and from each other. The 

 former Dingier thinks near B. inclinata Kern., but says it may be 

 new. The Cheshire specimen, passed by Sudre, is referred to var. 

 suhcanina by Dingier, though its sepals rise considerably. All 



