148 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES. 
Rubus calvatus , Blox. ? Gawdy Hall Wood, Harleston, Norfolk, 3rd 
August, 1886. — E. F. Linton. “ R . pyramidalis , Kaltenb. (1845; not 
Babgt. (1849).” — Dr. Focke. 
R. calvatus , Blox., Biddulph, Stafford, Sept., 1885. — W. H. 
Painter. “ I doubt, and cannot accept as proof of new record.” — 
C. C. Babington. 
R. villicaulis , Koelil. Biddulph, Stafford, Sept., 1886. The Rev. 
W. H. Purchas says, ‘ This is certainly the same as a bramble which 
I find in this neighbourhood, and which has been named R. villicaulis , 
Koehl. by Dr. Focke ; but it is considerably different from the R. 
villicaulis of other districts; I hope to learn more about this.’ — W. 
H. Painter. Prof. Babington and Dr. Focke concur in the name. 
R. villicaulis , Koehl. Perfeddcoed Road, Bangor, August, 1886. — 
J. E. Griffith. Mr. Griffith wrote to me afterwards saying that he 
feared he had mixed two different brambles under this label, and that 
none of it was villicaulis . This I had noticed ; and it accounts for the 
wide difference between the replies received. Dr. Focke named the 
specimen sent him out of this set, R. fuscus, Wh. and N., while 
Professor Babington said of his specimen, “ certainly not villicaulis. 
Appears to be Reuteri .” It thus appears that Carnarvon may be 
credited with two fresh Rubi. — E. F. L. 
R. villicaulis , Koehl. Railway bank, Ballingham, Hereford, 19th 
July, 1886 . — Augustin Ley. “ Villicaulis .” — C. C. Babington. 
“ R. hirtifolius , P. J. Mull, et Wirtg .forma pilosis sima. ” — Dr. Focke. 
Rubus ? Mousehold Heath, Norwich, 20th August, 
1886; a small, very neat, compact bush. — E. F. Linton. “ R. 
pyramidalis , Kaltenb. (1845), not Babgt.” — Dr. Focke. 
R. adscitus , Genev. Peterstow, Hereford, 8th July, 1886. — 
Augustin Ley. “ R. amplificatus , Lees, I think; not R. adscitus .” — 
Dr. Focke. “ I think this must stand under rusticanus , notwith- 
standing several peculiarities ; such as much more hairy stem, and 
form of leaves.” — C. C. Babington. Some of the specimens in this 
lot shewed leaves white-felted underneath ; in others, this feature was 
absent. I gathered R. rusticanus last August at Harleston, Norfolk, 
of a similar character ; the leaves which were green beneath looked 
very unlike rusticanus. — E. F. L. 
R. macrophyllus , W. and N., var. ? North side of Beeston Park, 
Norwich, 4th August, 1886. — E. F. Linton. “ Differs only slightly 
from R. Schledendahlii , Wh. and N.” — Dr. Focke. “ Macrophyllus = 
Schlectendahlii.” — C. C. Babington. 
R. Borreri, Bell-Salt. Heathy plantations, near Beacon Hill, 
Monmouth, 3rd Sept., 1886 . — Augustin Ley. “ Sprengelii probably.” 
C. C. Babington. “ R. Sprengelii, Wh.” — Dr. Focke. 
R. Borreri, Bell-Salt. Knypersley, Biddulph, Staffs., Sept., 1886. 
W. H. Painter. “ Borreri.” — C. C. Babington. “ R. Sprengelii, 
Wh.” — Dr. Focke. 
R. Borreri, Bell-Salt, var. dentatifolius. FI. Plymouth, p. 121. 
By R. Teign at “Holy Street,” Chagford (in shade), S. Devon, 18th 
August, 1881. Specimens also from two other localities in Teign 
valley, S. Devon, where it is locally abundant. Seen and accepted 
as this form by Mr. Briggs, Dec., 1886. — W. Moyle Rogers. 
