BAKER ON BRITISH ROSES. 17 



styles. R. conslmUis, Deseg. has few prickles, glabrous or slightly hairy 

 petioles, almost glabrous leaves, a small glabrous roundish fruit and gla- 

 brous styles ; and R. Ozanonii, Bcscg. unarmed branches, hairy and glan- 

 dular petioles, leaves both hairy and glandular on the midrib beneath, 

 glabrous peduncles, and a small spherical fruit with woolly styles. But 

 none of these are known in Britain, and leaving out of view Lindley's 

 ^ pilosa, which seems to be altogether a doubtful plant, there is no need, 

 so far as Britain is concerned, to speak of sub-species here, and no diffi- 

 culty in finding well-marked distinctive characters to rely upon. It is the 

 only British rose which has the flowers essentially single, and from its 

 nearest allies, the character of its fruit and sepals separate it readily. 



B. rubella is represented in Winch's collection at Newcastle, by two 

 specimens in flower, marked " Durham Coast," with ovate, glabrous, 

 simply toothed leaves, slightly setose but not hairy petioles, bracts with 

 spreading setoso-ciliated auricles, peduncles closely aciculate and setose, 

 ovate calyx tube slightly setose at the base, and simple but decidedly leaf 

 pointed sepals, which are glandular over the back, and the largest of which 

 is about as long as the petals. According to the descriptions (British 

 Flora, &c.) it has few prickles, but numerous setae on the stems, cernuous 

 mature peduncles, short oval drooping fruit, firm in texture and bright 

 red in colour, shortly oval, tapering at each end or somewhat urceolate in 

 shape, and crowned by the persistent sepals. But a plant in Mr. Eobert- 

 son's collection, marked " This is mentioned by Smith in E. B. as R. 

 rubella. On sand of sea shore between 'V\Qiitburn and Sunderland, Durham, 

 plentifully," is a mere red fruited form of spinosissima. In the Transactions 

 of the Tyneside Naturalists' Club, vol. iv. p. 185, Mr. John Hogg, of 

 Norton House, Stockton-on-Tees, gives an account of a rose which he 

 gathered near his own residence, and which was pronounced by Winch 

 to be B. rubella, as lately as 1832. Of this he has kindly supplied me 

 with specimens, and it also is evidently a mere form of spinosissima, with 

 pinkish flowers, slightly glandular petioles and aciculate and setose 

 peduncles. So that for the North of England we have no authority for 

 the occurrence of the true plant, except the original statement of Winch. 

 R. rubella as just described recedes from R. spinosissima in the direction 

 of R. alpina, approaching the latter closely in the nature of its fruit, and 

 diff'ering conspicuously from the former. There are jolants in the Swiss 

 Alps, which come very near to the above characters, which are considered 

 as hybrids between spinonissima and alpina by M. Reuter, and one of 

 No. 2, May 14. C 



