82. K. DIVERSIFOLIUS. 219 



notclied, clawed, white. Stamens and styles yellowish. 

 Primordial fruit-stalk shorter than the sepals, hearing a 

 fruit, which is often small, from few of the large black 

 drupes ripening. 



This plant seems to approach the 1\. Wahlbergii (Arrh.), 

 but the authentic specimen (Fries, //. N. ix. 49) is dif- 

 ferent, and will be noticed under R. corylifolius y pur- 

 jmreus. Arrhenius appears by his description to intend 

 to convey the idea (although he does not actually say so) 

 of a plant wanting setse on its stem, but having them on its 

 flowering shoot. As it is quite impossible for that bota- 

 nist to have overlooked the abundant glands which tip the 

 smaller aciculi of R. diversifolius as well as the plentiful 

 setae, it appears certain that it is not R. Wahlbergii. It 

 may probably be the it, nemorosus c. ferox (Arrh.), and the 

 variety of R. dumetorum, so named on table 45 B of the 

 Ruhi Germanici ; but the plant there represented is far 

 more prickly throughout than R, diversifolius. 



Tliat our present plant is the R. diversifolius (Lindl.) is 

 shown by his own authentic specimens and by the remark 

 in the second edition of his Synopsis (94). That he also 

 gave the name of R. Radula to it is similarly shown by his 

 specimens now before me. Mr Baker gathers a form of 

 R. diversifolius al)undantly in N. E. Yorkshire which has 

 no felt beneath its leaves, but seems to agree in all other 

 respects with the true plant. He states that sometimes 

 there is a little white felt on the leaves. R. Schleiclieri of 

 Leighton apj)ears never to have any felt, but typical R. di- 

 versifolius almost always has a considerable quantity ; never- 

 theless I believe the two are states of one species. Mr Ba- 

 ker's specimens, although without felt, are more near to the 

 type than to R. Schleiclieri. M. Genevier identifies this 

 plant with the R. horrefacti's ]Miill. 



The specimens marked "A", dumetorum^ . and N. var. 3 



