94 
dumetorum  group. — E.S.M.  It  is  curious  that  Crepin 
should  have  made  so  much  of  the  projecting  styles,  which 
is  not  at  all  an  uncommon  feature  of  the  Caninae.  This 
plant  seems  quite  at  home  in  the  Pubescentes  ( dumetorum ) 
section.  The  question  is,  are  its  sepals  persistent  ?  I 
think  not,  because  it  is  very  exceptional  for  plants  of  the 
group  coriifolia,  Fries,  to  which  it  would  then  belong,  to 
have  other  than  densely  woolly  styles,  in  a  rather  large 
head,  so  I  do  not  see  my  way  to  go  further  than  R. 
dumetorum ,  Thuill,  sensu  lato.  It  is  not  R.  implexa,  Gren., 
which  has  its  leaves  never  more  than  slightly  hairy  on 
midrib  only,  while  these  are  hairy  all  over  beneath,  not  on 
veins  only  as  Mr.  Ley  says.  The  leaves  of  dumetorum  are 
often  glabrous  above  but  the  petioles  are  very  rarely 
prickly  as  in  this  plant. — A.  H.  W.-D. 
R.  glauca,  Vill.  Saintfield,  Co.  Down,  July  18  and 
Sept.  3,  1906. — C.  H.  Waddell.  Doubly  serrate  leaf  and 
glandular  petiole :  good  subcristata.—  A.  Ley.  I  agree. 
Fruit  remarkably  round. — E.S.M.  Yes,  of  the  group 
subcristata ,  Baker. — W.  Barclay.  Not  glauca  pure  and 
simple  but  R.  subcristata ,  Baker. — A.  H.  W.-D. 
R.  glauca ,  Vill.,  var.  Reuteri  (Godet),  fide  J.  E. 
Bagnall.  Lowesby,  Leics.,  v.c.  55,  July  1905.  New  record. 
Until  the  publication  in  1904  (Jl.  Bot.)  of  additions  to  the 
Flora  of  Leics.  since  1886  there  was  no  record  of  R. 
glauca ,  Vill.  for  v.c.  55.  Then  R.  glauca  (aggregate)  and 
the  vars.  subcristata ,  implexa  and  Watsoni  were  added  to 
the  list.  I  have  since  found  the  var.  subcariina,  Christ, 
and  the  present  var.,  if  it  can  be  considered  as  not  the 
typical  form.  Since  Mr.  Bagnall  first  identified  this  plant 
for  me  from  the  above  locality  I  have  found  it  in  several 
other  stations. — A.  R.  Horwood.  Not  Reuteri — if  the 
sepals  rise  and  are  persistent  then  subcristata. — A.  Ley. 
Styles  nearly  glabrous ;  bracts  not  so  broad  as  in  R. 
glauca ,  etc.  I  think  that  it  is  R.  canina  var.  dumalis. — 
E.S.M.  Not  Reuteri.  If  a  glauca  form,  of  which  I  have 
some  doubt,  then  subcristata ,  Baker.  Should  be  gathered 
later  to  make  sure  that  it  is  not  R.  canina ,  var.  dumalis , 
Bechst. — W.  Barclay.  In  the  first  place  R.  Reuteri  of 
Godet  is  regarded  by  most  authors  as  synonymous  with 
R.  glauca,  Vill.,  in  fact  it  is  usually  taken  as  the  type  of 
the  group.  In  the  second  place  R.  glauca,  Vill.  and 
