164 ROSACEAE 



First found at Hen Wood by the author in 1884. 



2. Ock. On the Boar's Hill Kange as in Hen Wood, in the copse 

 where R. idaeus var. anomalus occurs, and in the open ground 

 near, where it is abundant and luxuriant, but M'itb the shape of 

 the leaf not quite typical. Also in the grounds of the Earl of 

 Berkeley on the SW. side. 



5. Loddon. In and about a copse near Blaekwater Station, but on 

 the Berkshire side of the river. The plant is not quite typical. 



The ripe fiaiit has a distinct raspberry flavour. 



R. fissiis is recorded for Hants and W. Gloucestershire. 



B. nessensis, W. Hall in Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh, iii. (1794) 21. 



R. subcredus, Anders, in Linn. Soc. Trans, xi. (1815) 218. 



Syme, E. B. iii. 164, t. 444. Eogers' Key, 2. 



Native. Sylvestral. Heathy woods, bushy places in upland situations. 



Local. Shrub. July-August. 



First record. R. suberectus, Snelsmore Common, Russell's Cat. 1839. [In 



the New Bot. Guide, R. suberedus is stated to be recorded in Smith's 



English Flora by Mr. Bicheno fi'om Newbury, but on p. 406 of that 



work there is no inention of Berkshire. 'i2. ni7ic?Ms,' which is R.pli- 



catus,W. & N., is given thei'e, and may have been confused with it.] 



2. Ock. Bagley Wood. Boar's Hill. 



4. Eennet. Snelsmore Common, A^ew^fewr?/ Ca^. IS ewhuvy, Brit. Herb. 



in Linn. Soc. and Bab. Brit. Rubi, 53. Near Silehester. 

 .0. Loddon. Ambarrow, very fine. Crowthorn. Long Moor. Fincli- 

 ampstead Leas. Wood near the Blaekwater at Sandhurst. 

 Wood near the Bog at Wellington College. 

 It is recorded for Surrey, Hants, Wilts, and W. Gloucestershire. 



In opposition to the views of Dr. Focke and the Rev. W. M. Rogers, I have 

 here used the name B. nessensis, Hall, which, in my opinion, has undoubted 

 priority over the more generally-used name of R. suberectns. It must be 

 remembered that Anderson changed the name, not because he thought that 

 his plant differed from that named by Hall (on the contrary, he says it is 

 ' the same, and so accurately described by him '), but because ' of the im- 

 propriety' of the name, which in his opinion was no longer applicable froni 

 the plant being found in other localities than the vicinity of Loch Ness, and 

 this Anderson 'trusts will be a sufficient excuse for his changing it.' But 

 Anderson ti-ansgressed the Laws of Nomenclature in acting as he did. 

 Advocates for the use of the later name lay stress on the fact that we are not 

 able to say with certainty what Hall's plant was, but Anderson accepted his 

 description as accurate. In fact, Anderson had a perfect right to expound the 

 characters of R. nessensis, but he had no right to change the name simply 

 because it was inappropriate. If such a proceeding were allowed, old- 

 established and perfectly valid (though inappropriate) names, such as 

 Gcntiana germanica, Bromus madritensis, and Epilobium viontanu)n, might be 

 altered. 



B. sulcatus, Vest in Tratt. Rospc. Mon. iii. 42 (1823). 



E, B. Suppl. ed. 3, 76. Rogers' Key, 2-3. 



