98 



perhaps in consequence of being from biuls originally intended for 

 the next year's flowering, these secondary branches have a different 

 habit, and become modified like those mentioned above, though in a 

 less degree. 



A remarkable instance of this resemblance of habit in a secondary 

 barren shoot to some of the characters of the panicle, is represented 

 in one of the plates in the work of Weihe and Nees, in which the 

 truthfulness of the artist is wonderfully shown, — there being no no- 

 tice of the circumstance in the text of the work. The sterile annual 

 shoot of Rubus nitidus is bright and shining, but the panicle — though 

 also with a shining rachis, and glabrous at the lower part — is hairy 

 towards the summit. Now when, from any cause, in this species 

 there arise small secondary barren shoots, these have precisely the 

 same kind of hairiness as that of the panicle, and this is the instance 

 in the work oi Weihe and Nees to which I alluded. In Tab. iv. are 

 represented a part of the vigorous growing shoot, quite glabrous, and 

 one of these secondary ones ; and in this latter may be seen, very 

 faithfully represented, the character now spoken of. 



Important however as I admit Mr. Lees' communication to be, as 

 respects the habits of these plants, and involving the necessity of cau- 

 tion in the matter I have above mentioned, — to his further remarks, 

 namely, the great modification of apparent specific character, I must 

 take the most decided exception. The first instance Mr. Lees addu- 

 ces, is that of Rubus caesius becoming R. dumetorum. He states 

 that " if it establish itself in a hedge, its leaves assume a firmer tex- 

 ture, its flowers are larger and more showy, but its beautiful fruit be- 

 comes of a dull purple, devoid of bloom or altogether abortive. In 

 this state the great German writers on Rubi have given it the name of 

 dumetorum, though it is impossible, on strict examination, to avoid 

 noticing every state between the creeping csesius and the erect dume- 

 torum."* Mr. Lees is very explicit in speaking of the erect habit of 

 the form he here calls dumetorum ; but on referring to the work of 

 Weihe and Nees, so far from finding them describe dumetorum as 

 erect, I find that in this respect the stems of both it and caesius are 

 described in precisely the same words, "caule procumbente," yet Mr. 

 Lees is equally explicit in stating that the dumetorum in question is 

 that of the " great German writers." In fact, without at all contest- 

 ing the point whether Rubus caesius and R. dumetorum may not each 

 of them, while supported, become more erect, or at all events more 



* Transactions of the Botanical Society of Edinburgh, i. 176. 



