distributor’s report for 1948 
95 
mosoine iiuiuber 2 ji = 28 against the liexaploid number 2n = 42, ol 11. 
Aretoselhi and that it differed from that species in the size of the fruits 
and anthers as well as in the narrower leaves. He raised it to sjiecific 
rank in Botaiiisla Notiser, 1941, 99-101, 1941. independently J had 
found that it remained constant in leaf-shape, although greatly in- 
creased in size when grown in my Surrey garden. Knowledge of its 
British distribution is incomplete but the localities so far known to 
me indicate tliat the northern and eastern tj'jie of range in this country 
as shown by Imve {But. Not., 1941, 165, fig. 10, 1941) is approximately 
correct. It is not restricted to sandy soils. — J. E. Lousley. 
Uhiius (jlabra Huds. x stricta Jjindl. \_Ulmus hollandica Mill.] 1, 
W. Cornwall; Lambourne, Perranzabuloe, June 29th, 1948, leaves only. 
This and U. strictu Bindley are both considered hybrids yet in Corn- 
wall, l)oth, as Elwes and Henry state, “ grow in every valley and ai'C 
certainly indigenous,” whde other forms of elm, in West Cornwall at 
any rate, occur sparingly. In v.-c. 1 1 have seen U. glabra Huds. only 
where planted. Production of suckers in Cornish trees of this species 
seems to be a response to cutting or damage. The 3 ’ occur plentifully 
l> 3 ' roadsides, but away from roads, as in the valley bottoms, the trees 
are almost always without suckers.” — F. Rilstone. “ This is a hybrid 
of U . glabra Huds. X stricta Lindl. The leaves show' a combination of 
characters of the two species. Hj'brids of this parentage are fairly 
frequent in Devon and CornwaU and also occur in Dorset. They usually 
lack well-developed coi'ky flanges on the suckers and epicormic shoots 
that are characteristic of xU . hollandica v. major (Sm.) Rehd., the 
•so-called Dutch elm, which is introduced in Cornwall.” — R. Melville. 
Ulitius hollandica Mill. var. major Sm. ; det. R. Melville. 1, W. 
Cornwall: Lambriggan, Perranzabuloe, fruits: April 27th, 1948; foliage: 
June 24th, 1948. From a tree wdth branches more pendulous than 
usual and without the usual fan-shaped growdh of the trees about it 
and so looking at a glance rather unlike hollandica. The trunk 
divides into two low down but the tw'o branch stems remain erect.— 
F. Rilstone* 
VI mils stricta Jnndley. 1, W. Cornwall; Lambriggan, Perranza- 
buloe, fruits: May 4th, 1948; foliage: July 16th, 1948. The larger 
leaves are from the main branches ; the smaller ones are from sucker 
growths and are characteristic of the hedge growth of the species. — 
F. Rilstone. “ Yes, excellent material of this species.” — R. Melville. 
Urtica dinica L. cf. var. pvhescens (Ledeb.) Traiitv. (Ref. Nos. 
6113a and 6113b.) 12, N. Hants. ; bank of the Whitewater river near 
Dipley, Mattingley, June 17th, 1948. — E. C. Wallace. “ Hegi (lUustr. 
FI. van. Mittel-Europa , 3, p. 139) refers to two pubescent varieties 
of U. dinica — var. pilosa Asch. & Graebn., wdth the leaves thickly 
clothed wdth grey hairs, and var. pubescens Ledeb. wdth the whole plant 
