189 



Notice of the ' Annals and Magazine of Natural History? Nos. 98 

 and 99. Dated April and May, 1845. 



The April number contains the following botanical paper : — 



' A Century of new Genera and Species of Orchidaceous Plants. 



Characterized by Professor Lindley.' 



In the May number are two botanical papers, as under : — 



' Descriptions of Three new Species of Rubus. By T. Bell Salter, 



M.D., F.L.S.' We give translations of the characters of the two first 



of these new species. 



1. Rubus tenuis. Stem procumbent, round, somewhat glaucous ; 

 prickles equal ; leaves ternate, rarely quiuate, somewhat glabrous 

 above, pubescent beneath ; leaflets obovato-acuminate, doubly ser- 

 rated, lateral leaflets lobed outwardly ; panicle decompound, 

 rarely cymose ; calyx pubescent, lanceolate, acuminate, appressed 

 to the fruit ; fruit small, black, composed of few large drupes. 



Var. B.ferox, prickles frequent, hooked. 



Syn. Rubus affinis, ^. {IV. 8f N.) Rubi Germ. 3, t. 3 b. Rubi cgesii 

 et R. corylifolii pars auct. var. 



Hab. Various places in the South of England. Var. /3. at " Ape's 

 Down," in the Isle of Wight. 



2. Rubus Borreri. Stem procumbent, round, prickly, clothed with 

 spreading hairs ; prickles frequent, long, slender, hooked ; leaflets 

 quinate, obovate-wedge shaped, somewhat glabrous above, with conco- 

 lorous hairs beneath ; panicle corymbose, lower branches long, 

 decompound, upper branches shorter, terminal flower somewhat 

 sessile ; prickles of the panicles few, peduncles pubescenti-hirsute ; 

 bracts lanceolate, hairy, lower ones ternate or dentate, upper ones 

 simple ; calyx ovate-lanceolate, much acuminate, pubescenti-hirsute, 

 loosely embracing the fiuit ; fruit black, hemispherical, composed of 

 small shining drupes. 



Inhabits the Isle of Wight. 



The reader will please to turn to a former number (Phytol. ii. 138), 

 for a detailed account of the third species (R. Babingtonii) ; and to 

 the Report of Proceedings of the Botanical Society of London in our 

 present number (Id. 191), for further remarks on all the species. 



' On the correct Nomenclature of the Lastraea spinosa and L. mul- 

 tiflora of Newman. By Charles C. Babington, M.A., F.G.S., F.L.S.' 



With regard to Mr. Babington's paper, we are compelled to ex- 

 press our regret that it should have ever seen the light, since it 

 is calculated to lead into error all those who blindly adopt this 



