350 TWO BERKSHIRE VARIETIES. 



the plant I have called var. Ramondiana. Their description is as 

 follows : — " Feuilles toutes, a I'exception des ultimas, k limbe 

 orbiculaire siibcorde, dente ou lobule, les ultimes trifides ou tri- 

 partites a lobes inegalement dentes." 



There is no specimen of Grenier and Godron's Ramondiana in 

 Paris, but a plant with two or three of the upper leaves not only 

 lobed, but cut into segments, coming, I believe, from Normandy 

 (where it is said to be very rare), and labelled with the query, " Is 

 this your Puvmondiana? " is preserved among Dr. Grenier's plants. 

 If I had known of the earlier names given by Lejeune and Courtois 

 when I wrote my Flora, I should have adopted them ; but I think 

 I have shown that I have sufficient evidence for the inclusion of the 

 var. Ramondiana {integri folia) among our Berkshire plants. 



[With regard to the foregoing, I would say that the fact of other 

 writers having misquoted Lejeune does not justify Mr. Druce in 

 doing so, or in continuing as above to place Lejeune's name in 

 brackets when quoting him as an authority for his variety. I made 

 no reference to the " clothing of the stem," but Lejeune's definition 

 is " Differe de I'espece principale par ses feuilles ciliees, plus etroites, 

 par sa tige velue, et comme chargee d'un tomentum roux, et par 

 son port plus petit": Rouy & Foucaud say, " tige plus ou moins 

 rougeatre, rameaux rougeatres." Mr. Druce inserted the plant in 

 his Flora because he thought it agreed with Koch's description, and 

 "after comparison with a continental specimen" — named we are 

 not told by whom, but clearly not authentic. 



As to Malva moscJiata var. Ramondia^ia, I confess myself unable 

 to understand clearly what Mr. Druce means, nor does he make 

 matters simpler by omitting from "Mr. Baker's remark in full " words 

 (already printed by me) which complete its sense. Here is the sentence , 

 — the words omitted by Mr. Druce are placed in brackets : — " I only 

 know this from the description [which is 'feuilles toutes entieres, 

 dentees']. The upper leaves [here] are certainly lobed." Mr. 

 Druce has seen no type, but seems to lay stress on a plant sent to 

 Grenier with a note — ^^ 1^ ihi^ yoxxv Puimondiana?'' I fail to see 

 what connection this can have with the point at issue. 



M. Rouy's confirmation of Mr. Druce's naming, however valu- 

 able, cannot affect the publication of these forms in the Flora of 

 Berkshire, as it was not received until after my criticism appeared. 

 I am therefore still of opinion that both plants were included " on 

 evidence which cannot be considered as sufficient," even if the 

 naming should hereafter prove to have been correct. 



I print Mr. Dr ace's note in full because he has charged me with 

 having treated him unjustly, and I am therefore anxious to give 

 him every opportunity of stating his case. Had it not been for this, 

 I should in the interests of my readers have declined to print 

 communications which scarcely add to our knowledge and hardly 

 touch the ground of my criticism. I do not, however, propose 

 to publish a further note of similar character which Mr. Druce bas 

 sent me. 



