912 



nent botanists, who have particularly studied the Rubi, as Sir J. E. 

 Smith, Drs. Weihe and Nees ab Essenbeck, Mr. Borrer and Professor 

 Lindley. But secondly, I have observed with the eye of an original 

 explorer, tracing every form that appeared to me different, without 

 reference to the ideas of other botanists. And thirdly, having observ- 

 ed the same plants in a living state for several successive years, I have 

 collated and revised my original observations, sketched every appa- 

 rent species, and compared them again and again with the figures, 

 descriptions and named specimens of botanists of authority. Thus I 

 have been enabled in a great degree to understand the forms to which 

 particular names have been assigned, and to test their propriety by my 

 own experience. I trust, therefore, that I shall not be considered 

 guilty of assumption when I may differ from others, being only anx- 

 ious for the nearest approximation to correctness. 



" It is unnecessary for me to go into the question as to what con- 

 stitutes a species in this genus ; for, as I have before hinted, it is not 

 unlikely that the forms in every group may be really only varieties, 

 sporting from a normal form and into each other. But if Botany be 

 a science of discrimination, it is at any rate convenient to name every 

 remarkable continuing form as a species or sub-species, since other- 

 wise minor variations can scarcely be distinguished, or must be placed 

 in the same rank with more important deviations of structure. Indeed 

 Nees Von Essenbeck, one of the authors of the elaborate * Rubi Ger- 

 manici,' has well remarked in a letter to the Rev. Mr. Leighton, in 

 the Shropshire Flora, — ' I am not of opinion that all the forms pro- 

 posed by my friend Mr. Weihe as species, are to be considered as 

 such, but in my opinion it is absolutely necessary to look for the great- 

 est number of forms which present themselves in the genus, before 

 attempting to judge of species and fixing their limits. I can scarcely 

 tell which is most perplexing in the path of our science, whether, with 

 Mr. Weihe, to distinguish as species every form of bramble that pre- 

 sents itself to our view, or, with Mr. Koch, to consider all as modifi- 

 cations of one only. In this case I do not doubt that these are mat- 

 ters purely of observation, and that the faithful observer of Nature 

 will find that the truth really is between these two extremes.'" G. E.D. 



Errata. — Page 880, line 31, for cautecaulis read caulicola : line 32, for Hystericuvi 

 read Hysterium. 



Page 889, line 4, for reticulate read 'parallel veins : line 5, for parallel veins read 

 reticulate. 



