342 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 



Rogers very kindly lent me a specimen of B. Bogersii, which 

 proved to be exactly like one or two which I have gathered in 

 Kent and Sussex, and a specimen in the "Type Set" named 

 "opacus" ; but none of them have the cordate leaves and crowded 

 prickles mentioned in his Handbook. It must, I should think, 

 be an indistinct species ; because Mr. Rogers himself saw plants 

 in bloom here in 1902, of which he could not say whether they 

 were Bogersii or not. B. Bogersii is common about Tunbridge 

 Wells, and I have identified it (I believe) with Dr. Focke's B. 

 ammobius, which is considered in Nyman's Conspectus to be 

 X plicatus, of which I had looked upon it as a variety. In the 

 National Herbarium there are at least two specimens, each named 

 by one authority ammobius, and by another Bogersii. It varies 

 much. 



Mr. Marshall may be interested in the fact that B. Marshalli 

 is common about Tunbridge Wells. Being of striking features, its 

 variations or hybrids are readily recognized, and are numerous.^ 



The difficulty of recognizing some of these hybrids (or varieties) 

 even by the best observers, unless their memories of the types are 

 refreshed at frequent short intervals, cannot, I think, be better 

 exemplified than by the following facts. There is in the British 

 Museum a specimen named B. leucostachys x imbricatus by the 

 Rev. W. M. Rogers, Dr. Focke, and Mr. Marshall in combination ; 

 a few sheets from it is another of the same plant gathered by the 

 same three gentlemen at the same place and on the same day, but 

 named B. leucostachys x Marshalli. 



I have lately ascertained the existence in Wales of B.montanus 



Wirtg 



I found it four 

 Wells. It seems to be the same as 



B. nemoralis var. Silurum A. Ley, with which I had identified it 



so labelled. 



Mr 



Bhavmifi 



towards the Suberecti than do Mr. Rogers's other varieties of 

 nemoralis. ^ At Llandrindod Wells it varies considerably, approach- 

 ing sometimes rhamnifoUus or carpinifolius, at others ni tidies or 

 plicatus. As the width of its own variation is greater than the 

 distance which separates it from nitidus on the one hand, and 

 from carpinifolius on the other, it seems to me more reasonable to 

 suspect it to be a hybrid than a separate species. This brings it 

 into connection with B. opacus and B. affinis var. Briggsianus, 

 both which are closely related to B. nitidus W. & N. Now I find 

 that in the " Type Set " at Kew a specimen of " B. nem. Silurum " 

 from the two Linton's is just intermediate between Mr. Rogers's 

 specimen and a specimen of B. opacus. What could be more 

 likely, if they are both hybrids of B. nitidus, as there are other 

 reasons for suspecting ? In Nyman's Conspectus, B. viontanus is 

 made a close ally of B. carpinifolius. 



