310 
S. aurita x cinerea. Blackdown, W. Sussex, April 23 and 
July 24, 1924. — R. J. Burdon. I agree. The leaves and the 
black scales of the catkins, both male and female, are nearer 
S. cinerea than the other parent. The slender catkins, both $ 
and 9 j the very short style, small ovary, and the rugosity of all 
the younger leaves, best seen from the underside, are ample 
evidence of the presence of S. aurita. The bluish pubescence of 
the younger leaves, mixed later with ± numerous red hairs, 
shows a combination of the two parents. — J. Fraser. Yes. 
Additional evidence of the presence of cinerea is to be found in 
the filaments, pilose in the lowest third part. — W. Watson. 
S. aurita x viminalis Newark Mill, Ripley, Surrey, v.c. 17, 
Aug. 6, 1922, and April 29, 1923. A marked feature of this 
willow is the very short catkins, which are not typical of the 
hybrid in my experience. They should have been collected at 
the beginning of April, when their shortness would have been 
even more striking The stipules are also large for this hybrid, 
especially on strong shoots. — J. Fraser. 
S. ferruginea G. Anders. Chevingum Farm, Godstone, Surrey, 
v.c. 17, May 6 and August 19, 1923. I write the name as above 
though I do not consider it a species. I regard it as a form of 
S. cinerea x viminalis , on account of the very short pubescence 
(not silky), and the numerous red hairs on the underside of the 
leaves. Sometimes the under surface is wholly rusty red, as the 
name implies. Some regard S. ferruginea as synonymous with 
S. aurita x viminalis , but there are good authorities for both these 
opinions. — J. Fraser. 
S. herbacea L. Near Dalwhinnie, Inverness. July 1911. — 
W. A. Shoolbred. An uncommonly large leaved and large 
catkined form of S. lierbacea. It is sometimes found on the 
margins of grassy ledges, or at the foot of rocks in sheltered 
places. The serratures of the fruiting pieces are much deeper 
than I have hitherto seen and are really remarkable. — J. Fraser. 
Helleborine purpurata (Sm.). Box Hill, Surrey, v.c. 17, Aug. 5, 
1924. — J. L. O’Loughlin. How this plant came to be regarded 
as an ambiguity I cannot comprehend. It is well figured in 
Eng. Bot., plate 2775, as Epipactis purpurata Smith. The 
characteristic purple colour is shown, and the old botanists, 
e.g. J. D. Salmon, knew it from Reigate and Box Hill, where it 
still grows. In Syme Eng. Bot. plate 2775 is copied, but the 
purple coloration is removed and the name altered to Epipactis 
media— a quite unjustifiable piece of botanical legerdemain. On 
