so 
BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB, 
arable field at Trevol, near Torpoint, E. Cornwall, September 19, 
1876.— T. E. A. B. 
Chenopodium Jicifolkiw, Sm. Waste ground behind the houses 
on the East Cliff, Brighton, E. Sussex. August, 1876, I send 
this because this vice-county is left without authority for the species 
in ‘ Topog. Bot.’ — J. L. Warren. 
Atriplex erecta, Huds., b. evecta, ‘E. B.,’ hi. On the coast, in 
dry, hard ground at G. Coppard’s Gap, west of Brighton, W. 
Sussex, August, 1876. This is an unusual coast form, and gene- 
rally grows in rich arable land. This coast plant is much fleshier 
than its inland congener. In this case a curious approaching to 
Atriplex arenaria is indicated, — J. L. Warren. This seems the 
same as the Hammersmith plant noticed by Professor Dyer, which 
he and I supposed to be the true A. erecta of Hudson. The seeds 
of the Hammersmith plant sown in Balmuto-garden produced 
A. anyustifoLia, Smith, with non-serrated leaves and large sub- 
foliaceous perianth-segments. — J. T. Boswell. 
A. triavgtdaris, Willd. Aldrington Basin, near Brighton, 
Sussex. August, 1876. — J. L. Warren. So I should name them. 
— J, T. Boswell. 
A. sinuata, Hoff. Coast at G. Coppard’s Gaj), West Sussex. 
August, 1876. In the last report of the Exchange Club (see p. 23), 
I hinted that this plant was probably introduced in this station by 
ships’ ballast. This year I have confirmed this fact, having dis- 
covered a dozen more plants near and around a large square black 
building used for the storing of grain, a furlong nearer Brighton 
than my three plants of last year. One day, seeing a ship 
unloading grain at this very pomt, I ascertained from the sailors 
that the cargo came from Eussia, The plant has got a fam hold of 
the coast, and, if not unduly gathered, will spread. I regret my 
specimens are so poor, but I was too early this year for matured 
examples, — J. L. Warren. 
Biimex nemorosiis, Schrad. [trigrarmlate form. ) Hedgebank near 
Torpoint, E. Cornwall, July 31, 1876. — T. E, A. Briggs. I should 
name this j)lant as Mr. Briggs does. It seems to me the same as 
once sent from near Lewes by the Hon. J. L. Warren, named 
E. rupestris ? So also I should name a plant sent by the Eev, 
Augustin Ley from Sellack, Herefordshire, August, 1876 ; but the 
Eumex sent by that gentlemen from river-side, Tintern, Mon- 
mouthshire, August, 1876, appears to me the ordinary form of 
E. cony lamer atiis . — J. T. Boswell. 
E. viridis. Bramber, Sussex. August 26, 1876. I fancy 
this Eumex is clearly viridis, and not conglomeratus ; yet it is as 
clearly as far on towards conglomeratus as it is easy to get without 
supposing hybridization. Observe how frequently two good-sized 
tubercles are developed, and occasionally three tubercles. — J, L. 
Warren. Evidently E. nemorosns a. viridis . — J. T. Boswell. 
E. vivid i-conglomeratus. By the Mole, Hampton, Surrey. Oct,, 
1876. Unlike the specimen from Bramber, this seems to me a 
hybrid between the two species above named. It is a notcAvorthy 
plant, and deserves study. I have marked the root, and hope to 
