12 



R. Bloxamii, Lees. One mile South of Newry, Co. Armagh, 

 July 15, 1901.— W. M. Rogers and H. Lett. 



R. fiiscus, W. & W. Streetley, near Aldridge, v.c. 39, 

 Staffs., Aug., 1898. — J. E. Bagnall. Just the plant described 

 on p. 76 of my Handbook of British Rubi as R. pallidtis, 

 W. & W. var. nov. leptopetalus. When first found in Britain 

 it was named by Dr. Focke R. Loehri, Wirtg., and then "a weak 

 form of R. fuscus;'' but when he saw the living bushes in 

 Herefordshire in 1894, he withdrew the name, and did not then 

 see his way to suggesting another. Meanwhile it has been 

 issued in the British Rubi set (No. 18 in part) as R. fuscus on 

 his authority. I think undoubtedly intermediate between 

 R. fuscus and R. pallidus, though on the whole nearer the latter. 

 — W.M.R. 



R. fuscus var. nutans, Rogers. Drayton Bassett, v.c. 39, 

 Staffs., July 15, 1897.— J. E. Bagnall. Yes.— W.M.R. 



R. rosaceus, W. & N. Meriden, also Combe Abbey Woods, 

 v.c. 38, Warwickshire, Aug., 1895 and Sep., 1896.— 

 ]. E. Bagnall. Yes, the type as found with us.— W.M.R. 



R. rosaceus (sp. coll.). Railway bank, Lindfield, v.c. 14, 

 E. Sussex, July 7, 1901.— R. S. Standen. I think that this 

 may belong to a form of R. rosaceus which is frequent in part of 

 Surrey and E. Sussex, and may be indistinguishable from 

 R. her chef iensis, Druce (see Handbook. Brit. Rubi, p. 79). If 

 so, it is one of the rosacean forms which strongly recall 

 R. Kaltenhachii, Metsch, but unfortunately the stem piece sent 

 is so immature that a definite determination is hardly possible. 

 From typical R. rosaceus, W. & N., it is of course considerably 

 different. — W.M.R. There was a mixture on these sheets, 

 four panicles being clearly corylifolian. I believe the sheets 

 distributed are correct. — A.H.W.-D. 



R. adovnatus, P. J. Muell. Shelley, near Solihull, v.c. 38, 

 Warwick, Aug., 1880.— J. E. Bagnall. Yes.— W.M.R. 



R. corylifolius, Sm. (forma). Mile Hill Lane, Aghaderg, 

 Co. Down, July 16, 1901.— W. M. Rogers and H. W. Lett. 



R. covylifolius, Sm. var. cyclophyllus, Lindeb. Kelsey gravel 

 pits, near Burstwick, v.c. 61, E. Yorks., Aug. 1, 1901. — 

 C. Waterfall. New to E. Yorks., teste W. Moyle Rogers.— 

 C.W. 



R. (Suberecti group). Lindfield, v.c. 16, E. 



Sussex, July 13, 1901.— R. S. Standen. Surely R. coesius. — 

 W.M.R. 



