99 



elevated, the latter, though stouter, is essentially as creeping a plant 

 as the foitner, running along the ground, and rooting, not only from 

 the terminal bud, but from others near it, as I had an opportunity of 

 observing not many days since. 



Again, in deriving, as Mr. Lees does, the R. diversifolius of Lindley 

 from caesius, there must also be some error. He says, " it is an erect 

 and more exposed form, stouter, and with a greater abundance of 

 glandulosity." Mr. Lees is again very explicit in stating that it is the 

 diversifolius of Lindley of which he speaks ; but on referring to this 

 author's Synopsis, it will be found that so far from being " erect^'' Dr. 

 Lindley's plant is ^^ arched ;'''' and that so far from there being a 

 ^^ greater abundance of glandulosity^'' it is not even placed in the same 

 section with the glandulose species, nor, in fact, is it at all a glandu- 

 lose plant. To this point, however, I shall have occasion to refer 

 again, when speaking more particularly of the plants found at Sel- 

 bome. Of Mr. Lees' third instance I am equally sceptical ; but as I 

 shall have occasion to speak of this also in my subsequent remarks on 

 particular species, I will not here dwell upon it. 



While on these general remarks, I would speak of one or two more 

 points. The effect of shade I believe to be, in general, to make the 

 plants more upright. With regard to hybridity, I believe, with Mr. 

 Lees, that there is no reason whatever for supposing it to occur. 



I have dwelt much longer than I intended on the general habits of 

 these plants ; and shall now proceed to refer more particularly to the 

 specimens which have led me to make this communication, and once 

 more turn my thoughts to the peaceful and picturesque retreats of the 

 classic Selborne. The nature and general aspect of this district I 

 have endeavoured to make known, in some degree, in my former com- 

 munication; and from what was then said of the nature of the locality, 

 it will readily be believed that the forms of Rubi may be numerous. 

 With respect to my own expectations, they fell far short of my find- 

 ings, a detail of which I now propose to offer to my fellow readers of 

 the ' Phytologist ; ' and in proceeding to do so, I propose to follow 

 the same plan as in my former notice, namely, first to give a list of 

 the species, with their localities, and then make such general or spe- 

 cial remarks on each, as may suggest themselves. 



The following are those observed : — 



Rubus affinis, W. <^ N. In the Lith. 



nitidus, W. S; N. Near the Priory. 



discolor, W. ^ A^. Far less common about Selborne than 



in most localities. 



