BICKNELL: HAVE WE ENOUGH NEW ENGLAND BLACKBERRIES? 399 
hybrid plant is verifiable by experimental proof. Its name, formed 
from the combined names of its parents, comes into being automat- 
ically with the birth of the hybrid itself. It is not the creation of 
any author. And it may well be asked why its already compound 
structure should be further burdened with the name of an author 
by whom a certain one, possibly of many, forms of the hybrid was 
first made known. 
No reason appears for instance why the author of the present 
paper should be cited as authority for the names of crosses which 
it becomes necessary here first toemploy. Nevertheless, in order 
more certainly to divest the subject from all nomenclatorial claims 
in these pages and to allow the free treatment of a tabular presenta- 
tion, I wish to be understood merely as pointing out the probabil- 
ity of the occurrence of the hybrids mentioned, not as announcing 
that they are known unmistakably to exist. 
RUBUS CANADENSIS L. 
R. elegantulus Bld. 
R. amabilis Bld. 
> ALLEGHENIENSIS: R. ovarius Bld. and R. pergratus Bld. so 
unite characters of R. canadensis and R. allegheniensis that 
a presumption of hybrid origin from those species seems 
unavoidable. 
X NIGRICANS: R. peculiaris Bld. appears to belong here. 
< HIsPIDUS: R. multiformis Bld. may well be a form of this 
cross. Certain specimens of R. vermontanus Bld. are not 
to be separated from R. multiformis. 
BAILEYANUs: The characters of R. recurvicaulis Bld. would 
appear to point to its origin in the parentage here suggested. 
PROCUMBENS: R. recurvicaulis, var. inarmatus Bld., and R. 
multiformis, var. delicatior Bld., should be studied in the 
field with reference to their probable relationship with R. 
canadensis on the one hand and R. procumbens and R. 
Enslenii on the other. 
In regard to Rubus Randii (Bailey) Rydb. there seems to be 
good reason to suppose that it is either a reduced form of R. cana- 
densis or a hybrid of that species. I have not seen the type speci- 
mens but, judging from current labeling of botanical sheets, there 
would seem to be no definite conception among collectors of just 
x 
x 
