206 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES. 
When in doubt, it is better to leave the name open on the label, and 
to make the remarks on the notes. “ R. Lindleianus , Lees.” — Dr. 
Focke. R. Lindleianus , Lees. Biddulph, Staff., 1888. New 
County record — W. H. Painter. “ Rather doubtful ; may be 
Lindleianus .” — C. C. Babington. “Yes.” — Dr. Focke. 
Rubus rhanmifolius , W. & N., a var. intermediate with R. Maassii , 
Focke, teste J. G. Baker. This season the leaflets are more rounded 
below, and more nearly approaching Maassii. Hayes Common, 
Kent, July, 1888. — Eyre de Crespigny. “Form of the rhamni- 
folius group, near R. Muenteri , Marss.” — Dr. Focke. “Can it be 
Lindleianus ?” — C. C. Babington. 
R. septorum, Mull. Bradley, S. Derbyshire, 20th August, 1888. — 
W. R. Linton. “ Why call this septoruni ? Genevier’s specimens of 
that are as he describes them, felted beneath the leaves. Focke is 
wrong in saying that Genevier places it among the Subereeti, unless he 
refers to some old essay which I have not seen. In my opinion it 
certainly does not belong to that group. This Bradley specimen 
seems to belong to the Rhamnifolii. I should like to know more 
about it. I cannot name it.” — C. C. Babington. “ Septorum, I 
believe.” — Dr. Focke. 
R. Questierii , P. J. Mull. Wood and rough ground near Bishop- 
wood, Herefordshire, 30th July, 1888. This appears to be a remarkable 
form allied to R. macrophyllus , W. and N. It occurs for nearly a 
square mile of rough and wooded ground in the above locality, and 
keeps its character well. The specific name I have ventured to give 
on account of its rather close resemblance to a plant picked by me in 
Jersey, and so named by Dr. Focke, in 1885. But I have seen no 
description of Questierii , nor do I know what other forms it is related 
to. — Augustin Ley. “Stem more channelled than usual. It is 
described by Genevier, p. 199. It is closely allied to calvatus , and 
with it will probably join with Salieri as an aggregate species.” — 
C. C. Babington. “ R. pub escens, W. and N. I have seen, however, 
the true R. Questierii from different places in S. England.”— Dr. Focke. 
R. Salteri , Bab. “Woods, Aconbury, Herefordshire, 12th Sep- 
tember, 1888. — Augustin Ley. “This name appears to be correct.” 
— Dr. Focke. 
Rubus. ? Mousehold Heath, Norfolk, 20th September, 
1888. — E. F. Linton. “Imperfect specimen; perhaps near R. 
argentatus , P. J, Mull ” — Dr. Focke. “When shall we persuade even 
good collectors to take note of the flowers ? I think this is my vestitus, 
which is hardly distinguishable from leucostachys , and probably ought 
not to be. It is also probably the conspicuus , Mull., and Leightonianus.” 
— C. C. Babington. 
R. calvatus, villicaulis, Kcehl., teste Dr. Focke. Shirley, 
Derbyshire, September, 1888. — W. R. Linton. “ Is what Bloxam 
named heteroclitus. In my ‘Notes’ I placed it under villicaulis , 
and I think I did right. I have Muller’s and also Wirtgen’s specimens 
before me.” — C. C. Babington. Mr. Linton notes, “ Dr. Focke 
without expressly assenting to this naming remarked on the identity, 
in his judgment, of calvatus and villicaulis.” 
