105 



ever a very pretty variety, with its shrubby terete and vaniished stems, 

 seldom growing so large as the common form. 



Ruhus leucostachys (Sm.), is one of the commonest species about 

 Selborne, and is certainly one of the best fruited of our brambles. It 

 is now so generally and correctly distinguished from its allies, and the 

 descriptions in our Floras are now so generally characteristic, that it 

 requires few words of notice in this place. It may be well to men- 

 tion however that there appears little doubt of its being the species 

 figured and described by Weihe and Nees as R. pubescens,* the otily 

 difference being, that in our British specimens, the leaves are fre- 

 quently rather more deeply and sharply serrated. In other respects, 

 both the figure and description of these authors admirably agree with 

 our plant, as does also the description of Mertens and Koch,t thus 

 still further identifying our R. leucostachys to be the German R. pu- 

 bescens. The vernacular German name given to this bramble, viz., 

 Weichhaariger Bromheerstrauch X (weak-haired bramble), is peculi- 

 arly appropriate. 



But though the typical form of this plant need not detain us long, 

 there is a certain state of it on which I would make some observations. 

 It is a form which I have enumerated in the list as the variety vestitus 

 of this species, by which I intend to discriminate a most remarkable 

 form, respecting which there has been much diversity of opinion. 

 The form in question is characterized principally by remarkably round 

 leaflets, an almost suberect growth,§ and a very shaggy clothing of 

 soft white hairs. That this is the form described as diversifolius by 

 Lindley, I have had an opportunity of verifying by a specimen in the 

 collection of Mr. Borrer, which he had from Dr. Lindley's own plant 

 in the Horticultural Society's gardens ; and that it is the vestitus of 

 Weihe and Nees is equally clear, from the circumstance that their 

 figure and description accurately agree with the description of Lind- 

 ley, and with the specimen from his own plant which I had the above 



* Bubi Germanici, p. 42, and tab. xvi. 



t Deutschland's Flora, iii. 499. 



X Ibid, and Deutchen Brombeerstrauche von Weihe und Nees, p. 44. 



§ The almost suberect growth in this instance may perhaps require some explana- 

 tion. It is in fact a truly arching form, as described by Lindley, but from the effect 

 of shade — an effect before alluded to, it assumes a higher arch than the exposed form 

 of leucostachys. This approach to a suberect growth is totally different from that 

 spoken of under R. nitidus, which is first suberect, and only roots afterwards by a dis- 

 tinct secondary growth. In the form now treated of, the arch, though high, is per- 

 fectly continuous. 



Vol. II. p 



