144 



THE NATURALIST. 



cula of Smith, a very different species, and one wliicli is commoner in Eng- 

 land than B. tomentosa. 



Petermann, Fl. Lipsiensis (1838), p. 364, No. 782, " Foliola 5-7 

 ovali-oblonga, cinerascenti-virentia villosiusculo-pubescentia." 



Gonnet, FL elementaire de France (1847), p. 478, "Leaves ashy 

 pubescent cottony on both faces." 



Kirschleger, Fl. d' Alsace (1852), vol. i. p. 249, "This species is distin- 

 guished from E. canina by its foliage being softly tomentose grey, and by its 

 straight prickles, upright, rather long ; and from R. pomifera by its ovoid 

 fruit tivice as srnall, red, upiigM, slightly hispid, cartilaginous, and by its 

 leaves elliptico-ovcil and not eUi]ptico-lanceolatey 



Cosson and Germain, flore des env. de Paris (1861), p. 221, "Leaves 

 more or less ashy on both sides, sometimes a little glandulose beneath, with 

 5-7 leaflets." 



Cariot, Etudes des Fleurs (1865), vol. ii., p. 190, "Leaves tomentose on 

 both sides destitute of glands beneath." 



On concluding this list of authorities — English, French, and German — 

 M. Deseglise remarks that English authors have certainly confounded 

 R. tomentosa Sm., and Smith has apparently taken the rarest English form 

 on which to found his species. Then later still R. scahriuscula Sm. has been 

 confounded with R. tomentosa, and these two plants are found united rinder 

 the same name in books, and mixed in herbaria. 



M. Grenier, flore de Jura (1864), p. 234, says that he has preserved the 

 name of R. tomentosa for this species, because the English specimens which 

 ho has, are identical with the French plant.^ M. Grenier cannot surely have 

 paid any attention to the No. 1662 (Fl. Gall, et Ger. exsic.) gathered by 

 himself and distributed by the late M. Billot ! Had he done so, he could not 

 liave said that the English specimens are identical with the French plant, for 

 the specimens gathered at Besangon are far from having, as M. Grenier says, 

 (1. c.) " Leaves charged ivith fine glands beneath,''' No. 1662, having the leaves 

 simply tomentose and destitute of glands. 



Smith's herbarium presenting the same confusion as subsequent authors 

 in describing R. tomentosa, we must have recourse to the text of the Flora 

 hrita7inica, without taking any account of the errors which have since been 

 committed, for all or rather the greater proportion of botanists describe this ' 

 plant according to the characters first assigned in 1800, and which 

 De Candolle in 1805, Gmelin in 1806, Persoon in 1807, Trattinick in 1823, 

 Eeichenbach in 1 830, Boreau in 1 849, have since confirmed. M. Deseglise again 



