104 



Linnaean specimen, that it was made up of portions of several species, 

 one of which is the R. plicatus ( W. 8^ N.), to which, in the very coun- 

 try of Linnaeus, concluding it to be the one intended by the great 

 author himself, Arrhenius now applies the name in his excellent Mo- 

 nograph of the Rubi of Sweden. The numbers of other species to 

 which the name has been applied, are beyond enumeration ; from 

 this circumstance, and the indefinite and inconclusive manner in 

 which the very author of it applied the name, it ceases to be one of 

 any distinctness or authority whatever. 



In applying the name of R. discolor [W. Sf N.), by which I now 

 enumerate my Selborne specimens, to the R. fruticosus of ' English 

 Botany,' and other British works, I have the concurrence of Mr. Bor- 

 rer, and also that of Mr. Babington, notwithstanding that the latter 

 gentleman had adopted the name o^ fruticosus in his Manual. 



With respect to the character and habit of the ordinary forms of 

 this bramble, I need add nothing. The figure in ' English Botany,' 

 and the descriptions in Hooker's and Babington's Floi'as, under the 

 name of R. fruticosus, are abundantly characteristic : and with respect 

 to its habit, 1 refer to my observations made above. When speaking 

 of the habits of Rubi, I more particularly took this species as the type. 



The variety mentioned in the list as var. thyrsoideus of this species, 

 is distinguished from the ordinary form of R. discolor, by the absence 

 of silkiness on the barren shoot, which is less angular, and frequently 

 of very nearly suberect growth, whereby it approaches somewhat to 

 R. nitidus in habit, from which, however, it is readily distinguishable 

 by the more simple and leafless panicle, and the absence of the loose 

 hairs — the only hairiness in this being a short slight tomentum to- 

 wards the top of the panicle, which is less prickly, and bearing paler 

 flowers, than in the ordinary discolor. 



This form is retained as a separate species by Weihe and Nees, 

 being considered by them to be the Linnaean fruticosus,* under which 

 name they describe and figure it. We find it, too, retained as a spe- 

 cies by Arrhenius, in his Monograph, but not as fruticosus, a name 

 which he applies to R. plicatus, but under the name of R. thyrsoideus 

 {Wimrri). By this latter name T propose to designate it as a variety, 

 it being evidently osculant with the ordinary R. discolor. It is how- 



* The description in ' English Flora ' admits of the idea that Smith may have in- 

 cluded this variety under his /ntiicosjw. — Eng. Fl. iii. 400. Leighton, in his Shrop- 

 shire Flora, describes a fruticosus as well as discolor, which, though evidently a mere 

 variety of the latter, is not the one here spoken of. 



