939 



Contents of the 'Botanical Gazette,' No. 17, May, 1850. 



A Descriptive Table of British Brambles. By T. B. Salter, M.D. 

 [" Increased observation," writes Dr. Salter, " on the multiplied forms 

 of these variable plants, both in the wild state and under cultivation, 

 has enabled me in numerous instances to associate several forms to- 

 gether, as varieties of a single species, which before were described as 

 distinct ; thus in many cases confirming my previous suspicions, and 



in other cases affording results which I had not anticipated." 



" In plants so varying as the Brambles it is easy to divide, but by no 

 means so easy to discriminate or associate correctly. These results 



can only be accomplished by careful observation." "In plants 



so varying, if the characters be too minutely given, few plants will 

 agree with the description : the species must either be multiplied 

 contrary to fact and truth ; or varieties, inconveniently numerous, be 

 introduced ; for it is found that even in the descriptions of varieties 

 some considerable latitude must be allowed, or they become. endlessly 

 numerous." Dr. Salter enumerates twenty-one species, exclusively of 

 the- Raspberry and herbaceous Brambles.] 



Literature : Contents of various botanical journals. 



Proceedings of Societies : Botanical Society of Edinburgh. 



Miscellanea : Press for drying plants. Victoria regia. Obituary. 



Ditto, No. 18, June, 1850. 



On Viola canina and its allies. By Charles C. Babington, M.A. 

 [" So much has been written in English journals concerning Viola 

 canina, that it may seem altogether unnecessary to add to what has 

 been well stated by others ; but the unsatisfactory account of that 

 plant and its allies which is contained in my ' Manual' (ed. 2, p. 36) 

 having necessarily directed my attention to the subject, it may perhaps 

 not be considered as intruding upon the notice of English botanists 

 if I point out the characters by which I propose to define the species, 

 and make a few remarks upon each of them." Thus writes Mr. Ba- 

 bington ; but we believe that he deceives himself in the reason that 

 he alleges. His attention was doubtless " directed to the subject" by 

 the announcement of his own and the late Mr. E. Forster's printed 

 errors respecting these plants, and by something very like a denounce- 

 ment of their persistence in errors that had been publicly pointed out 



