Mr. C. ©. Babington on the British Rubi. 175 
Obs. 1. I am now quite convinced that the common English 
plant is not R. affinis (W. and N.), and also that it is the R. co- 
rylifolius (Sm.), and have therefore removed the former name 
from our list and employed Smith’s nomenclature. The R. affinis 
(W. and N.) appears to have its basal leaflets very decidedly 
stalked, the prickles of its barren shoot much stronger than in 
R. corylifolius and defiexed, and that shoot much more angular. 
In R. corylifolius the shoots might often be called round, never 
truly angular. 
Obs. 2. Dr. Bell Salter noticed a plant at Selborne (Phyt. u. 
100) which he considers the typical plant of the R. affinis of the 
‘Rub. Germ.’; of this I possess only an imperfect specimen 
which does not seem to differ from the common form of this 
species, and certainly is not the R. affinis (W. and N.). 
Obs. 3. Plants are occasionally found resembling, and pro- 
bably referable to, R. corylifolius, which differ by having more 
angular stems and much stronger and deflexed prickles. I was 
once disposed to consider these as R. affinis (W. and N.), but 
their close similarity to R. corylifolius and the decidedly stalked 
basal leaflets of the plant figured in the ‘ Rub. Germ.’ have caused 
a change in my views. It should however be observed that a 
specimen from Dr. Weihe himself (Reich. Fl. Germ. exsic. 781) 
has the lower pair of leaflets sessile, and that in some of our 
plants these leaflets are very manifestly stalked. In other cases 
the prickles on the rather angular stems are not deflexed but 
declining. 
Obs. 4. The panicles of plants referable to this species often 
differ very remarkably, not in their real structure but in appear- 
ance. In some they are narrow, short and close ; in other cases 
the lower branches are very much elongated and spreading ; but 
all the intermediate forms may be found. The colour of the 
barren stem is usually purplish-green, but sometimes it is of a 
rather dark purple tint. 
Obs. 5. Smith, in his first description of R. corylifolius (FI. 
Br. 1, 542), says that the calyx is inflexed, and Woodward (With. 
Bot. Arr. ed. 3. ii. 470) says, “bent inwards and clasping the 
fruit.” In his later works (Eng. Bot. 827; Eng. FI. ii. 408) 
Smith corrects this, stating that it is reflexed. This will proba- 
bly explain the difficulty which foreign botanists have found in 
determining Smith’s plant; and the ‘Fl. Brit. being the work 
most frequently in their hands will account for their so generall 
referring R. corylifolius (Sm.) to R. nemorosus (Hayne), R. du- 
metorum (Weihe). 
[To be continued. ] 
