﻿49 



This handsome bramble seems to me to be nearest on the whole 

 to R. pulcherrimus and R. imbricates. Dr. Focke, however, in Koch's 

 Syn. ed. 3, has placed it as an allied form after R. macr<>}dii t llus : 

 and it certainly shows considerable resemblance to the R. glabratus 

 Bab., which in our lists has hitherto ranked as a var. of macro- 

 phyllus, though not without recent misgivings on Prof. Babington's 

 part, as appears from his remarks in Journ. Bot. 1886, 225, 22b*. 

 I must own that after a careful study of these plants (in the field 

 as well as in the herbarium), I am strongly of opinion that the 

 alliance of our glabratus with Mueller's itemoralis is closer than it is 

 with macra/Jii/llus. I should therefore prefer regarding it in future 

 as a var. of the former, to be distinguished from it by the following 

 characters: — Pan. much narrower awl more cylindrical, with far 

 Shorter subequa! lower branch,:* and lotujer-pedirelhvl fl. Pet. com- 

 paratively small and inconspicuous. Sep. more acuminate and more 

 strongly reflexed. 



This var. is locally abundant and very constant in character in 

 the valley of the Wye (Heref., W. Glost.). I have not yet seen it 

 in any of our southern counties, though the Christchurch plant 

 referred to in my "Essay" [Journ. Bot. 1892, 205) seems to take 

 one step towards it away from typical nemoralis. 



I had renewed opportunities of studying the Devon R. ramosus 

 in the Plymouth neighbourhood last summer, and of comparing it 

 with a very full series of R. mercicus Bagnall (the plant referred to 

 as " the usual ramosus of the Midlands" in my "Essay," and fully 

 described in this Journal in 1892, p. 372); and I find myself forced 

 to the conviction that the latter is much more nearly allied to 

 R. durescens, R. villicaulis, and R. pulcherrimus than to the Devon 

 plant, which, but for its glabrous (or very nearly glabrous) stem, 

 might seem most at home among the Discolores. 



R. villicaulis Koehl. What I have spoken of in my "Essay " as 

 "the nearly glabrous form common in S. England," and which 

 I have now received from N. Ireland, Scotland and Wales, as well 

 as from many parts of England, north and south, is considered by 

 Messrs. Friderichsen and Gelert to be identical with the Scandi- 

 navian R. Selmeri Lindeb. ; and it certainly seems to me indis- 

 tinguishable from very good specimens of that plant which I have 

 received from them. I would therefore suggest our classing it in 

 future as var. b. Selmeri Lindeb. It is unquestionably the R. affinis 

 Blox., and differs from typical villicaulis by its long styles (equalling 

 or exceeding the stamens), its strong falcate prickles, its greener and 

 more roundish Its., and its much more glabrous condition generally. 



Resembling this in some respects, but looking rather inter- 

 mediate between it and R. gratus, comes a Dorset plant (from 

 Norden Heath near Corfe Castle, and Branksome Park near 

 Bournemouth), of which Mr. Gelert writes to me, " Seems to be 

 identical with Danish and Swedish R. villicaulis var. insnlaris (F. 

 Aresch.)." The Bev. E. S. Marshall has also collected what 

 appears to me the same form from near Fowlis, E. Boss, where he 

 found it "locally abundant." This we may distinguish as — 



Var. c. insularis (F. Aresch.). Like var. Selmeri, but with thicker 



