NOTES ON BRITISH RUBI. 231 
pallidus, et states on p. 42 that that specimen belongs to R. incultus 
of Miille Wirtgen, and a second time quotes the same specimen 
under that name on p. 869. I therefore retain our name pallidus 
. Koehl 
f. R. cavatifolius Mill. I do not observe that Baker has taken 
any notice o cavatifolius, which I retain as a form o 
Koehleri, and have pain in my former notes and in the 
‘Manual,’ ed. 8. I hav w seen specimens of it from Trelleck, 
Monmouth ; Bichosetsie Baie (Groves) ; a ieee Norfolk 
(G, Fitt) ; and Tor Point and An thony, Cornwall (Bri 
Génévier named a plant sent by Baker to Déséglise (Sept. 1864), 
and gathered at Clives, Yorkshire, R. longicr = Mull as 
called R. Koehleri by Baker, and requires further study. 
35. (457) R. rusco-arer Weihe? I do not know the R. badius 
Focke, and therefore think it best to ner the name usually 
then he also asic the R. fusco-ater ke Focke ; he had, however, a 
specimen before him from ‘‘ Gallo es, PO near Mesham, an 
Twycross,” sent as R. fusco-ater ned wire m, terre: as I believe, 
mernosily: named, according to our ideas. I ye gh the R. 
ai. 1, n. 64), to which he refers), on from a poco gathered 
by him at « Letmalhe, in Westphalen,”’ which I should have 
considered as R. fusco-ater; but then he — 2 amongst his 
Hystrices, where I should not place his specim w before me. 
— imens named R. fusco-ater by Génévier nares muieibly with 
I place the R. horridicaulis Mill. here on the authority of 
Baker’s specimens from St. Anne’s Hill (Sept. 1867), to which I 
have already referred under R. montanus, and French ones named 
by eb and Génévier 
ualidus Génév. is s exceedingly: near to R. fusco-ater, oe 
chiefly he its ‘‘organes incolores”; that is, it has ‘ 
blanches . . . styles verdatres” ; but R. fusco-ater has ieeenians 
roses . . . styles roses. 
86. (459) R. piverstronrus Lindl. This is the R. myriacanthus 
Focke, R. diversifolius of Génévier, and I quite believe of Lindley in 
2nd edition. I know nothing of the plant of Tineo, nor does 
Nyman mention it. I shatehae retain Lindley’s name published 
in 1835. I possess a fine series of English a all so-named 
by Génévier, from Thirsk, Sessay, Caieey: and Twy: I do not 
consider it advisable to accept R. horridus as the pace ees an aggre- 
gate species, for the Swedish —— differ lepers amongst 
themselves; some are much like our R. pallidus, others are R 
diversifolius. The remarks of oredr show the difficulty attending 
- appropriation of f the name R. horridus. ee the specimens 
included by Génévier —_ R. diversifolius as ly 
R. ferox Fekhbeg bcc rophorus M. & L. is “considered by 
Génévier to be a Shite aeasaeaae variety of this; it does not seem 
