86 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES. 
Rubus affinis^N. and N.,with terminal leaflet quite commonly lobed, 
or having three leaflets in its place. Niton Down, Isle of Wight (in 
great quantity), July 21, 1883. — W. Moyle Rogers. “ I place pretty 
certainly to R. fissus.” — C. C. Babington. 
R. wibricatus , Hort. Glen Stapleton, Gloucestershire, Sept. 8, 
1883. This station is in the same vice-county (West Gloster) as that 
recorded by the original describer of the species. The Rev. F. J. 
A. Hort became acquainted with the plant on the borders of Mon- 
mouthshire, north of the Severn. My specimen grew about 30 miles 
distant to the south, in the direction of Plymouth, where Mr. Briggs 
had discovered this bramble some years before. The Glen Frome 
locality has been published in the * Flora of the British Coalfield,’ 
part II., 1882 . — Jas. W. White. “ Correct.” — C. C. Babington. 
R. thyrsoideus , Wimm. Buckden, Huntingdon, Jan. and July, 
1883. Fairly common in the district, though not nearly so frequent 
as the ubiquitous R. discolor. — E. F. Linton. “Good R. discolor , 
Weihe.” — J. G.- Baker, 
R. Grabowskii, Weihe. Putney Heath, Surrey, 1883 . — Eyre de 
Crespigny. “ R. thyrsoideus , Wimm.” — J. G. Baker. 
R. macrophyllus , Weihe, var. heteroclitus , or near it. Plantation, 
Harrow Weald Common, Middlesex, 1882 . — Eyre de Crespigny. 
“ R. leucostachys , Sm.” — J. G. Baker. 
R. Salteri , Bab. Putney Heath, Surrey, 1883. — Eyre de 
Crespigny. “ Is I think R. carpinifolius , W. & N.” — C. C. Babington. 
R. hirtifolius , Mull. Waste ground, Stranmillis, Belfast, Sept. 23, 
1883. — S. A. Stewart. “Is R. villicaulis , W. and N.” — J. G. Baker. 
“ I believe to be villicaulis.” — C. C. Babington. 
R. villicaulis , W. & N. Stirtloe, Hunts. Sprowston, E. Norfolk. 
These, if correct, are I believe new records. It is not a common 
form in either locality. — E. F. Linton. These have been passed 
by Mr. Baker as correctly named. 
R. villicaulis , W. & N., approaching leucostachys. Strawberry 
Hill, Clevedon, Somerset, August 29th, 1883. Differs greatly from 
the well marked and abundant leucostachys , with which we are so 
familiar in this district. I hesitate to think it nearer the latter than 
to R. villicaulis , from which it differs, however, in the clothing of the 
leaves and the felted panicle. — J as. W. White. “ Villicaulis ; has a 
very poor piece of stem, but the leaves are very fine.” — C. C. Babington. 
R. macrophyllus , Weihe., var. b. or c. Failand, Somerset, Aug. 30, 
1883 . — Jas. W. White. “This is typical macrophyllus.” — C. C. 
Babington. 
R. macrophyllus , Weihe. Coleshill Wood, Middlesex, Nov. 8th, 
1883. — W. R. Linton. “ Is I think a weak form of Schlechtendalii.” 
C. C. Babington. 
R., considered by Mr. Baker to be near R. Bloxamii , Lees. 
Leigh Wood, Somerset, Sept. 17,-1883 . — Jas. W. White. “Is 
apparently R. rhenanus (Mull.), as I judge by a specimen so named 
by Genevier. I have not yet found rhenanus in Herb. Genevier, but 
I hope to do so. I cannot find out where Muller described it. 
Rhenanus is much more hairy, and the panicles different ; see Briggs’s 
‘Flora of Plymouth,’ p. 122. The name depends on Genevier’s 
