ON RUBUS IDREUS. 109 
In some respects, malin pic one may perhaps compare this species 
with two other natives of Europe, viz., 2. suberectus, Ands., and’ R. 
The fact of the leaves of vc suberectus, Ands. having a disposition to 
become LS pmege is, in my opinion, no reason at all for endorsing the 
view of a more intimate relation between that species and 2. deus, L., 
for the following reason :— n the leaves of this latter are pinnate, 
they are perfectly so, every oait "of leaflets being separated from the 
others by the pr rolongation of the petiole; but in 2. suberectus, Ands., 
when its leaves are septenate, the two lowest pairs of leaflets are not 
leaflet there are three, which the lateral ones are sessile and 
approximated to the sige one. Such a division of the terminal 
eaflet is not very unusual in several others of the European Lub, 
. Ideus, L. 
lesa been mentioned, this is not the Besides, hybrid forms 
graduate generally into the parents; bats such intermediate forms 
between suberectus and R. Ideus have never, to my knowledge, 
been found. On the ethics hand, the intimate relation of 2. suberectus, 
Ands., to B.  eaptite L. oe is evident, and intermediate forms are by 
- means wanting (¢.g., 2. fissus, Lindl.). Besides, in the determina- 
tion of this point we ek not forget that R, suberectus, arse ., ZTOWS 
and then o cal in the southernmost 
group of fruticose Branibies characterised by thin 
analogous to R. ch, however, “belongs to a quite 
erent group. On another occasion I hope to show that 2. suberectus, 
Ands., is the oldest, and consequently also least variable, 
- Species of all in the group it represents. It is the very same form 
at grows in Sweden, N ower! Denmark, Great Britain, and in the 
Species. Every t e produces a romero gt which are an "ee 
to the forms produced by related types. 
this manner are very often supposed to be hybrids between the speci 
Which. constitutes the most characteristic form of their type, aa 
