FRENCH AND GERMAN VIEWS OF BRITISH RUBI 201 
fi. calvatus X Questiert.” Such hazardous shots do more injury 
to the critic’s reputation than to the bramble’s specific character. 
estteri is not known for Derbyshire, or any of the adjoining 
counties. To anyone who has seen i 
origin does not appear a happy one. | 
R. Setmert Lindeb. We should readily agree to restore this 
to specific rank, which we have hesitated doing before, chiefl 
because Dr. Focke so long ranged it with R. calvatus Blox., an 
spoke of that as being identical with a R. villicaulis form of North 
Germany. But i to be remembered that under the name 
KR. calvatus he included the two very different plants which we dis- 
tinguish as R. calvatus and R. Selmert. M. Sudre also considers 
that this plant (Set, No. 80) does not belong to R. villicaulis Koehl. ; 
but it does not appear to be known for France. 
R. arcentatus P. J. Muell. Dr. Focke replaces R. argentatus 
P. J. M. by R. Godroni Lec. & Lam., 1847 (‘in part ?”), wherei 
. M. as a 
synonym. M. Boulay and Dr. Focke thus concurring, we see no 
sufficient reason to differ. 
R. ortuoctapos A. Ley (n Boulay). Dr. Focke rather un- 
ceremoniously renames this R. euchloos, on the ground that Mr. 
Ley’s name was already used by Boulay. M. Boulay’s name is, 
however, defunct, he having himself identified his R. orthoclados 
with R. anoplostachys P. J. Muell., published eight years previously 
oO Fl. Fr. vi. 
On the Continent it occurs in the province of Namur, Belgium, 
where it was discovered in 1898 by M. F. Gravet. 
R. moxutssimus Rogers. ee no reason for removing 
R. danicus Focke and &. mollissimus Rogers from their position in 
our list as varieties of R. hirtifolius M. & W. This was the place 
chosen for his RF. danicus by Dr. Focke in 1896; and we can feel 
no doubt as to the close connection with it of our R. mollissimus. 
eu Foe is very doubtful if we have the typica 
plant. Dr. Focke placed two Norfolk plants near his R. Banningii— 
one from Bees rew, a form with h stem (‘‘ near 
hold Heath, which we have considered rather to be R. Gelertii 
Frid. Neither is quite identical with R. Banningii, teste Focke and 
