808 
perhaps  form,  is  frequently  gathered  in  mistake  for  V. 
verna  — -C.  E.  Moss.  Apparently  this  is  the  /3.  glandulosa 
Legr.  in  “  Bull.  Soc.  hot.  France,”  30,  p.  70.  Rouy  (“FI. 
de  France,  vol.  11,  p.  50)  says  of  it  “  Plante  tres  velue, 
glanduleuse.  I  have  gathered  it  in  a  more  extreme  form 
on  the  sandhills  between  Deal  and  Sandwich,  E.  Kent ; 
and  it  is  probably  not  uncommon. — E.S.M. 
Euphrasia  - ?  Leigh-on-Sea,  S.  Essex,  v.c.  18, 
Aug.,  1910.  W.  R.  Sherrin.  E.  nemorosa  H.  Mart. — C.B. 
This  is  certainly  very  near  E.  nemorosa  in  habit,  and 
would  have  been  so  called  by  Mr.  Townsend;  but  I  have 
several  similar  gatherings,  all  of  which  were  named  E. 
curta,  var.  glabrescens  by  Prof,  von  Wettstein.  It  is  too 
hairy-leaved  for  E.  nemorosa ;  and  the  foliage  agrees 
better  with  that  of  E.  curta,  var.  glabrescens. — E.S.M. 
E.  Kerneri  Wettst.  Roman  Road,  Gog  Magog  Hills, 
Cambs.,  v.c.  29,  Sept.  20,  1910.— Coll.  R.  H.  Goode. 
Comm.  G.  Goode.  I  hope  that  specimens  of  this  Eye- 
bright,  which  I  first  gathered  in  1901,  will  be  acceptable 
to  members.— G.G.  The  blue-flowered  E.  Kerneri  is  an 
uncommon  form,  I  think,  and  one  that  I  have  not  before 
seen.  All  that  I  have  seen  in  Surrey  are  white  in  flower. 
— H.W.P.  Yes,  beautiful  and  typical  specimens  of  E. 
Kerneri,  I  believe.— C.E.S.  Quite  matches  the  Chelsham, 
Surrey,  specimens  named  by  Dr.  Wettstein. — A.B. 
Beautiful  specimens  of  E.  Kerneri. — C.B.  Beautiful 
specimens  of  the  typical  large-flowered  form. — E.S.M. 
E.  borealis  Towns.  Near  the  Lighthouse,  Swanage, 
Dorset,  v.c.  9,  Aug.  7,  1910.^R.  S.  Standen.  I  think  this 
is  a  form  of  E.  borealis  Towns.,  but  it  is  very  dwarf  and 
thick-set,  and  the  leaves  are  more  hairy  than  usual.  Very 
few  “  cauline  leaves  ”  are  present  on  my  specimens. — E.D. 
Correctly  named,  but  not  at  all  typical.— E.S.M.  Yes, 
E.  borealis  Towns. — C.B. 
E.  stricta  Host.  S.  Croxton,  Leics.,  v.c.  55,  July  8, 
1910. — A.  R.  Horwood.  Hardly  stricta.  It  appears  to  be 
•a  slender  and  poorly  developed  nemorosa  ;  the  specimens 
are  so  badly  dried,  however,  that  it  is  not  possible  to  deal 
with  this  material  satisfactorily. — E.  &  H.D.  The  speci¬ 
mens  received  by  me  are  quite  unlike  my  No.  2500  from 
