1867—68] BOTANICAL CORRESPONDENCE. 367 



to narrow to their base, and those of the branches have mostly short, 

 although very short, stalks. Nor is the tip hooded, as I have always 

 found it to be in true praelongus; but terminates in a point like those 

 of lucens. It seems also to have the winged stipules of that plant. 

 But then its leaves are not minutely denticulate like those of lucens. 

 I think that my account of the plant was taken from my Irish speci- 

 men. I have seen nothing like it from any place. I do not think 

 that my specimen named "longifolius Gay" is lucens, as it wants 

 the denticulation. It is Keichenbach, "Fl. exsicc." No. 2501. I am 

 sorry to say that P. nigrescens is wanting in my copy of the " Herb. 

 Normale." I have what I believe to be true nitens from Sim, out 

 of the Tay at Perth. It has not turned black ; but then Moore's 



plant from Kerry has done so partially I am glad to learn 



that you have the true nitens from Elgin and Nairn. — Yours very 

 truly, Charles C. Babington. 



To the same. 



Cambbidge, July 19, 1867. 

 Dear Syme, — I am very much obliged to you for so very kindly 

 sending me the specimen of Calamintha Briggsii. I have planted 

 part, and am drying part of it. It does look very different from 

 C. officinalis and G. Nepeta, but I do not see any good character. 

 Do you want a day here ? I shall be at home until about the 

 8th of August, if you like to come. — Yours truly, Charles C. 

 Babington. 



To T. R. Archer Briggs, Esq. 



5, Trumpington Road, Cambridge, Oct. 31, 1868. 



My dear Sir, — What is the Ruhus sent to the "Botanical Journal" 

 by Bloxam as " very distinct " 1 Have I seen it, and expressed any 

 opinion upon it ? Could you conveniently send me a root of your 

 Viola permixta for my Garden ? I have what I believe to be the 

 Viola multicaulis growing, and should like to see them side by side, 



especially as I have never, I believe, seen a bit of the permixta. 



Believe me to be, yours very truly, Charles C. Babington. 



Send us a parcel by rail. 



To the same. 



Cambridge, Nov. 14, 1868. 



My dear Sir, — I am much obliged to you for the roots {Viola 

 permixta), all of which are planted. I am sorry that you paid the 

 cost of sending them, as I should gladly have had to pay it. I am 

 inclined to place the Rubus Briggsii with R. fusco-ater (the true plant), 

 and think that it very closely resembles a plant from Henfield, which 

 I place to that species, and Mr. Borrer names nemorosus. I am looking 

 with much interest for Mr. Bloxam's description of R. Briggsii, which 



