360 



less plaited towards the margin, strongly and unequally serrated, 

 sometimes jagged ; their under surface hoary and finely downy, but 

 not white or cottony, strongly ribbed, with many fine, transverse, 

 parallel, connecting veins." So that in this singular misapprehen- 

 sion of a common bramble, Smith is blamed by Lindley and Dr. Bell 

 Salter as having described R. nitidus from wrong specimens ; while if 

 Mr. Babington be now correct as to nitidus, Smith had really de- 

 scribed it under the name of plicatus ! My own impression is, that 

 Mr. Babington and Dr. Bell Salter are mistaken in their designation 

 now, as Smith and Lindley have been before ; and if we are to rely 

 upon Esenbeck, his R. nitidus is, after all, but a variety of plicatus, 

 which I really believe is the case. Acting, then, upon this belief, I 

 will now proceed to a confirmation of the view I have taken. 



The nitidus of Weihe and Nees in the Rub. Germ, is placed by 

 them in their " Divisio prima," having the barren stem quite smooth 

 — " caule folii fere glabro," and it is evident they intend a bramble 

 nearly related to R. suberectus, for they refer to Anderson's plant in 

 the Linn. Trans., as well as the plate of R. suberectus in Eng. Bot. 

 2527. This plate could surely never be said to represent the bramble 

 I have in view. They reiterate, too, in their general and particular 

 description of R. nitidus, that the barren stem is smooth. Now the 

 plant described by Dr. Lindley and myself under the name of leuco- 

 stachys is at once cut adrift from nitidus by its pilose stem. Lindley 

 has placed it in a division with the stems " distinctly downy or hairy," 

 and describes the panicle as " very long, leafy, hairy." So I find the 

 shoot of the year invariably clothed with scattered hairs, and closely 

 hairy at the base. And here I would remark, that in doubtful cases 

 the base of the barren stem should be examined, as towards the ex- 

 tremity of the shoot, even in hairy brambles, the pilosity often disap- 

 pears ; but in a true hairy or pilose bramble I have invariably found 

 its stem much more hairy at the base, while in smooth-stemmed Rubi 

 it continues smooth to the base, or in ca^sious ones, more bloomy still 

 below. The figure of R. nitidus in Rub. Germ, is assuredly very un- 

 like the bramble I have in view, and sent to Mr. Leighton, and this 

 Mr. Babington admits when allocating his plant (erroneously, as I 

 conceive) in the suberect group. "The panicle is here considerably 

 different from that of all the preceding species. It is much more 

 compound, irregular, and often rather close, nor do any of our speci- 

 mens quite accord with the figure in Rub. Germ, of this part." My 

 own opinion decidedly is, that no figure in the Rub. Germ, distinctly 

 exhibits the bramble before us; but in some points the description of 



