ROSA MICRANTHA VAR. BRIGGSII 119 
I e not seen satisfactory British specimens; the two 
Déséglise’s herbarium are both marked with doubt, and rachel 
so, as they are considerably off type. Mr. Baker’s No. 23, fro 
Box Hill, has suborbicular leaflets quite uncharacteristic for 
R. hystrix; they are also decidedly more hairy, its fruit is broadly 
void. Messrs. Groves’s No. 29, collected by Brotherston at 
Yetholm, in Roxburgh, has just similar leaflets to those of the 
Box Hill plant, and is still more untypical in its ellipsoid-urceolate 
fruit. Both these specimens might rather have been labelled 
R. permizta Déségl. Mr. Baker’s short description in Monogr. 
p- 222, is good. He also records it from Caversham, Oxfordshire, 
and Bt. chime, a8 S : 
ct 
Lc} 
S 
cd 
a8! 
ocr 
ga 
bo 
® 
s long virgate stems, with short 
alternate flowering- branches, and in its typical form should be 
easily recognized. 
RosA MICRANTHA var. BRIGGSII 
Baker, yore. Brit. Roses p. 222 pavers 
broad, naked a andular than the type beneath ; aye 
tube and fruit oe r gti stouter, and, like the peduncles, quite 
naked ; eta more pinnate and scarcely pony ras on the back. 
b he dias 
Sepals long ‘and considerably pinnate, reflexed, not glandular 
on back, but somewhat gland-ciliate. Styles rit shortly 
projecting.” 
This is an endemic and nee local variety, having been found 
only in the neighbourhood of Plymouth, where ar has been 
gathered in several different naa though it does not apps 
to occur in Cornwall. Briggs thought that 
St. Thomas’s Head, Somerset, collected by Mr. ie ee ‘this 
esa Ie but Mr. Baker and o thers held. are 
a form of &. Me an. 
