POTAMOGETON RUTILUS IN BRITAIN 67 
I agree with M. Magnin in referring P. cespitosus Humnicki 
(Cat. Pl. de Luxeuil, 60 (1876) ) and P. reptans Humnicki (i. c. 61) 
to P. pusiiius L., and not to P. rutilus Wolfgang. These are the 
authority on which P. rutilus has been reported as a Frenc 
species. 
In Dr. Lees’s Flora of West Yorkshire, p. 418, a plant is re- 
ported as growing in ‘clear clay-bottomed ponds at Dringhouses,” 
which Dr. Lees names P. pusillus L. var. rutilus Wolfg.; I have 
the Berne Herbarium, as I have already noted in this Journal for 
1895, p. 24, there is a sheet of specimens labelled ‘‘ P. pusilius. 
Kly, Cambs. 25 July, 1825, Henslow’’; part are true pusillus, and 
part rutilus, but they are not mixed, so perhaps a label has been 
lo 
e are differences in habit between rutilus of Wolfgang and 
cwspitosus of Nolte, but not enough, in my opinion, to constitute a 
varie Nolte’s plant has much the habit of some forms of 
Sm. (Eng. 
Bot. t. 418), P. Friesii Rupr., and P. dideri Meyer, under oe 
plants of Ruprecht and Smith. 
A riting the above, on going through all the doubtful 
i iz from 
Expnanation or Prare 407.—A. P. rutilus Wolfg., nat. size, drawn 
the specimen in the Holmesdale Natural History Club Herbarium. B, Apex of 
leaf, enlarged. CO. Portion of stem showing stipule, nat. size. 
Fr 2 
