805 
close  resemblance  to  Wirtgen’s  “Herb.  Menthar.  Rhenan.” 
Ed.  III.,  No.  16.  “  M.  sylvestris  L.,  var.  nemorosa  autt., 
M.  nemorosa  Willd.  Forma  fol.  ovatis,  stamin.  inclusis.” 
I  think  it  is  this,  though  it  is  also  very  near  No.  25, 
M.  rotundifolia  x  nemorosa  Wirtg.,  a  more  hoary  plant 
with  stamens  slightly  exserted.— E.F.L.  The  specimen 
sent  to  me  has  no  flowers,  so  I  can  say  nothing  as  to  that ; 
but  surely  it  differed  from  those  sent  to  other  referees,  as 
it  has  no  sign  of  rotundifolia  in  it.  That  it  may  be  near 
the  nemorosa  quoted  by  Mr.  Linton  is  likely,  but  it  is  not 
the  nemorosa  of  Willdenow’s  herb. ! _ A.B. 
M.  rubra  Sm.  f.  Old  quarry  near  Ross,  Hereford  sh 
v.c.  36,  Sept.  29,  1910— A.  Ley.  This  is  the  plant 
recognised  by  Malinvaud  as  M.  rubra  Sm.  and  gathered 
by  him  as  a  subspontaneous  weed  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  houses  in  France.  It  should  be  noted  that  M.  rubra 
Huds.  is  probably  quite  a  different  thing,  which  he 
describes  (“Flora  Anglica,”  1798,  p.  252-3)  as  “  floribus 
verticillatis  ;  caulibus  diffusis  ;  foliis  subsessilibus,  ovato- 
lanceolatis,  serratis,  acutis,  subnudis;”  while  his  M. 
sativa  is  credited  with  “floribus  verticillatis;  caulibus 
erectis ;  foliis  petiolatis,  ovatis,  serratis,  acutis,  villosis.” 
Most  British  authors  look  upon  M.  rubra  as  a  species  or 
variety  differing  from  M.  sativa  in  its  longer  leaf-stalks 
while  Hudson  regarded  his  M.  rubra  as  differing  from  that 
species  by  having  shorter  petioles.  Hudson  should  not 
therefore  be  cited  as  the  authority  for  the  plant  with 
longish  petioles  usually  referred  to  as  M.  rubra  in  British 
Iloias.  S.T.D.  This  is  near  to  M.  ocymiodora  Opiz, 
m  “  Naturalientausch,”  No.  10,  p.  22  (1823),  but  differs  in 
the  exserted  stamens,  and  the  stem  base  nearly  glabrous. 
A.B.  I  agree  to  this  as  M.  rubra  Sm.,  and,  according  to 
my  herbarium,  it  is  the  usual  British  form,  though  I  am 
aware  that  it  is  not  quite  like  the  figure  in  “English 
Botany,”  ed.  III.  M.  rubra ,  as  I  know  it,  has  short 
roundish-ovate  bracts,  not  so  ovate  or  ovate-oblong  as 
they  are  figured _ E.F.L. 
M.  gentilis  L.  Roadside  ditch,  near  Malvern,  Worcs. 
v.c.  37,  Sept.  9,  1910.— S.  H.  Bickham.  I  think  that  this 
is  not  typical  gentilis ,  Avhich  has  calyx-teeth  much  more 
hairy,  but  rather  var.  Wirtgeniana  F.  Schultz,  as  it  has  the 
long-petioled  leaves,  stalked  whorls,  etc.  of  that  form.  I 
