NOTES ON BRITISH RUBI. 229 
subsuleate ; prickles many, short, declining from a long compressed 
base ; strong short aciculias well as sete and hairs few; leaves 8-5- 
nate: leaflets doubly dentate, opaque and pilose above, pale green and 
pilose beneath ; terminal leaflet broadly obovate-cuspidate, subcordate 
ow; panicle usually large, leafy, with subracemose or nearly 
simple branches ; its pore few, small, slender; its aciculi and 
sete slender, few, except near the top of panicle and branches ; 
. debilis Boul.?; stem arcuate, 5-gonous, with flat sides ; 
prickles small, deflexed from a long compressed base; acicult few, 
er, U bagn ual ; sete very gle ine onspicuo us; hairs few or none; 
a se a sngalene also the inne ae ant are more 
possible, therefore, that our Plymouth plant is the 
R, debilis Boul., although distinct from R. scaber. This j is ae 
the plant referred to by Génévier on p. 164. 
3) caber N.; stem prostrate, terete or 5-gonous ; 
prickles small from a compressed nae ex eclining, 
strong, very short; aciculi, sete, an s few; loaves 3-6- mes 
Re ace with patent soba branches; 8@ eG 
t with petals eit oblong, _—_: stamens 
white, mee exceeding ‘the green styles, ultimately in 
82. R. 
much dittentig here. Mr. Baker’s specimens from ‘‘ hedges at 
Chertsey, oe 1867,” and “cultivated at Kew, 1867,” are accepted 
by Génévier as R. rudis. I think that this and our plant called &. 
rudis are the R. echinatus Lindl., perpen 1829, and it seh 
“*inflor. ample, ramuli divarieati,” sic 
&. rudis by ahr They are similar to the Surrey plant gathered 
by Mr. Beeby at Reigate, and another Areschoug at 
Kilburn, Matin These plants seem to me to have no relation- 
ship with R. Leightoni, which I consider to be a form of K. Hadula. 
