211 
V. bithynica L. Bank above Publow, N. Somerset, June 11, 
1922. See Journ. Bot. 1922, p. 209, as to its flowering.— 
H. S. Thompson. 
Lathyrus maritimus Bigel. Chesil Bank, Dorset, Aug. 26, 
1922. The dominant plant there over a large area. — H. S. 
Thompson. 
Prunus domestica x insititia. Lane, Purwell, Hitchin, Herts., 
July 25 & Oct. 10, 1922. At the time of flowering there was 
pubescence on the peduncle; on one or two this was still trace- 
able in July. — J. E. Little. The twin peduncles, more or less 
pubescent, the dense pubescence along the midrib of the underside 
of the leaves, and the serratures of the latter point to P. insititia. 
The size of the leaves and the oval fruits are those of P. domestica. 
— J.F. 
Rubus fissus Lindl. [581J. Festiniog valley, Merioneth, v.c. 
48, Sept. 13, 1918. — W. 0. Barton. Quite typical; gathered 
here by Lees in 1848 (Hb. Babington).— H.J.R. 
R. Rogersii Linton [621]. Denham Golf Links, Bucks., v.c. 
24, June 21, 1922. — W. C. Barton. Yes, and very close to 
R. ammobius Focke (large leaves, less prickly panicle, etc). But 
to establish ammobius the living flowers must be seen. Focke 
now puts ammobius in a subordinate position to Rogersii (which is 
already known from Bucks.). — H.J.R. 
R. opacus Focke [553], Abrook Common, Surre}', v.c. 17, 
July 11, 1922. — W. C. Barton and H. J. Riddelsdell. Pink 
flowered form. Both Sudre and Focke think opacus Focke is 
nearer to plicatus than to nitulus. But Sudre thinks most of our 
English opacus merely a form under niticlus : whereas Focke (who 
saw it growing) identifies the English and German opacus. Focke 
thinks it a cross between plicatus and affinis (though it often 
grows where they are not), and puts it with ammobius under 
Rogersii. — H.J.R. 
R dumnoniensis Bab. [583]. Borth y Gest, Portmadoc, Car- 
narvon, v.c. 49, Sept. 1, 1922. — W. C. Barton and H. J. Riddels- 
dell. Yes ; Sudre’s arrangement of dumnoniensis under pyramidalis 
Kalt, as a subordinate form is interesting (in view of the rather 
hairy stem), though not convincing in view of its general charac- 
ters. Sudre seems much disposed to make his arrangement 
depend too much on leaf character. — H.J.R, 
R. ramosus Briggs [547]. Littleworth Common, Surrey, v.c. 
17, July 11, 1922. — YV. C. Barton and H. J. Riddesdell. Yes; 
