moist shaded places on the rocks, usually growing- in large tufts, 

 which are conspicuous for some distance. It passes in Califor- 

 nia for H. rubescens^ but seems to differ from that species as 

 described and figured in Stansbury's Report, 388. pi. 5. in the 

 longer and narrower calyx and shorter and broader calyx lobes. 

 Nor does it seem to be H. rubescens var. glandulosa Kellogg, 

 the type of which came from the Donner Pass region, but at 

 a much greater elevation, over 9000 feet. H. lithophila was 

 noted at from 6500 to 7500 feet, but it perhaps has a greater 

 altitudinal range. 



Eiibacer veliitmuiii (H. & A.) 



Rubus velutinus H. & A. Bot. Beech. 140. 1840. 



Riibiis Nutkanus v<ix. vehttiniis Brewer, Bot. Cal. 1: 172. 

 1876. 



Rubus parvifiorus var. velutinus Greene, Bull. Torr. Club, 

 IT: 14. 1890. 



Dr. Rydberg has recently well segregated these plants so 

 different from typical Rubus^ giving to them the name Rubacef\ 

 Our Calif ornian plant of the coast region is certainly as well 

 worthy of specific rank, if not more so than is R. parviflorum^ 

 which differs principally from the original species in the white 

 color of its flowers. R. velutinum differs from the other species 

 in its thicker, densely velvety pubescent, evenly serrate leaf, 

 and dry, insipid fruit. These differences are not due merely to 

 exposed and unfavorable conditions of growth, as might be sup- 

 posed, for they hold under normal conditions, namely, in deep 

 shaded ravines along permanent streams, with a northerly ex- 

 posure. It is not uncommon near Los Gatos in the foothills of 

 the Santa Cruz mountains, growing under the conditions just 

 described. 



