10 



Sonchus arvejisis, L., Maritime form? Beagh I., Strangford 

 Lough, Co. Down, Sept., 1892.— C. H. Waddell. Intermediate 

 in character between the type and var. maritimus, Wahlenberg 

 Flor. Suec. ed. 1, 1824.— A. B. 



Sieracium holosericeum, Backh. Y Tayfan, Carnarvon. July, 

 1891.— J. L. Williams. Correct— A. B. 



ccesium, Fr. ? Llandudno, Aug., 1892. — J. L. Williams. 

 This agrees admirably with Mr. Ley's plants from the Wye 

 recently described in J. of Bot. as IT. hritarmicum var. vagense. — 

 F. J. Hanbury. 



H. Schmidtii, Tausch. Near Ilfracombe, N. Devon, July, 

 1 892.— W. H. Painter. Correctly named.— F. J. H. 



S. gothicum, Fr. Cwm Llebrith, S. Carnarvon, June, 1892. — 

 J. L. Williams. S. tridentatum^ Fr. (= rigidum, Hartm.). — 

 F. J. H. 



H. Farrense, F. J. H. ? Gt. Orme's Head, July, 1892.— J. L. 

 Williams. A maritime form of S. ruhicundum, F. J. Hanb. — 

 F. J. H. 



J3:. stenolepis ? Gt. Orme's Head, July, 1892.— J. L. Williams. 

 I believe correctly named, but very abnormal, owing probably 

 to the situation in which it grew. — F. J. H. 



H. 7'uhicimdmn ? Cwm Glas, Snowdon, Aug., 1892. — J. L. 

 Williams. Two sp. are rulicundum, one a murorum form. — F. J. H. 



JB[. eiiprepes? Cwm Glas, Snowdon, August, 1892 — J. L. 

 WilKams. Correctly named. — F. J. H. 



S. diaphanoides, Lind. Railway bank, Conway, May, 1892. — 

 J. E. Griffith. This plant is by no means typical diaphanoides, the 

 phyllaries being too floccose, and the whole plant too hairy in 

 all its parts for that species. It is a form I know from many 

 parts, and appears almost intermediate between H. diaphanoides 

 and H. vulgatum, I should call it probably a vulgatum form. — 

 F. J. H. 



H. tridentatwn, Fr. Near Coxwold, Yorks., Sept, 1892. — 

 A. B. Hall. Is com?nutatum, Beck. {— S, horeale, Fr.) — 

 F. J. H. 



