ROSA AGRESTIS 123 
together, petals white, slightly emarginate. Peduncles and germen 
glabrous. The glands in this species are reddish and pedicellate, 
giving a reddish colour to the under surface of the leaflets, and 
emitting a smell. These glands are situated on the serratures of 
the leaflets, on wo Baste, stipules, and on the edges of their 
segments. Flo in June; ee which is an inch long, and 
eres 28 oval, ripetia in Septem 
éséglise’s description in Ess Ss. | Monod p. 104, is:—‘‘ A small 
branching shrub, with greenish, divaricate, penden nt, spiny branches, 
the prickles on the old wood rather strong, dilated at the — 
almost straight, those of the young branches smaller, geminate. 
Petioles glandular, prickly ae Leaflets 5-7, shortly petio- 
late, the terminal longly so, acute at the base, small, oval, acute 
at each end, glabrous above, a little glandular beneath, serrate, 
with glandular teeth. ipules narrow, glabrous above, with 
cb glands beneath, and glandular edges. actin div aio. 
Peduneles short, glabrous, solitary, rarely two together, with two 
opposite, oval, acute, glabrous bracts at the base, bordered with 
glands, and hiding the peduncles. The inner sepals tomentose 
erect and caducous. Calyx-tube oval, aeons. Flowers small, 
whitish. Styles short, glabrous. Fruit ovoid, black when ripe.— 
Very near Li. sepium, from which it aiffors by a different habit, 
its small oval leaflets, its peduncles always solitary, not in a 
corymb, iss glabrous styles, its small white flowers, and its smaller 
6, es 
sls’ No. pi — o be the most typical specimen in 
his i ne , but even that ge mater poe aie boas has 
slender comaiphtieh peoblen, very small leaflets, §-3 in. long by 
4—5, in. broad, rather broader in coger to their length than 
those of R. sepium, almost glabrous. Peduncles solitary, ;5—3 in. 
long. chor’ — 8-1in. long. Sepals all fallen. Styles very 
thinly his 
E 
more frequ ently in Britain. I am Sroctiiie ar two oe 
Bi because their segregation has usually been preserved 
on the Continent, but the modern tenden ye s to combine them, 
even Rouy and Keller, who make very a iae distinctions 
between their species, now making the synonymous. 
Déséglise has no British examples labelled en agrestis, though I 
think that those who wish to preserve the distinction will find 
examples from Britain which agree with that species in their 
small subglabrous leaflets, small more or less ellipsoid frui t, and 
glabrous or —— ous styles. 
Rhodologist oni to have agreed to disregard Savi's characters 
large fruit, 1 in. long. Déséglise, in 
peers flowers than R. agrestis. 
fos either species, 
