REPORT FOR 1889. 
*55 
Fraser from Wrottesley Wood, Wolverhampton, October, 1887.” As I 
possess both specimens cited I have compared them with my own 
and find Mr. A. Ley’s plant differs only in the presence of more hairs 
on the barren stem, and sepals scarcely so prolonged. Dr. Fraser’s 
plant is like some of the states of the Crackley Wood plant, which is 
very variable. This is the chief bramble of Crackley Wood and 
the hedges of Crackley lane ; it is also abundant at Corley, Hartshill 
Hayes, and Bentley Park. — J. E. Bagnall. 
Rubus thyrsiflorus , W. and N. Howie Green Wood, 26th July, 1889. 
I believe this to be the same plant as one sent by me last year from 
“Woods, Hope Mansel, Herefordshire,” and referred by Professor 
Babington to R. thyrsiflorus , by Dr. Focke to R. Loehri , Wirtg, — 
Augustin Ley. “Probably R. thyrsiflorus .” — C. C. Babington. 
R. scaber , W. and N. Peat moor, near Shapwick, North Somerset, 
2 1st August, 1889. This has an unusual appearance, which I believe 
may be the effect of soil and situation. Dr. Focke considers that it 
agrees with R. scaber in all essential characters. — J. W. White. “I 
am glad to see that Dr. Focke accepts this.” — C. C. Babington. 
R. rudis , var. microphyllus , Blox. Middleton Heath, Warwick- 
shire, September, 1889. Upon specimens sent to Professor Babington, 
confirming my nomenclature, he says : “ This is the R. sertiflorus 
(Mull.), of which the older name is R. Lohri , of Wirtgen (1857). 
Most of Wirtgen’s specimens are rather larger than yours, but seem 
decidedly the same plant.” I think by the laws of priority Mr. 
Bloxam’s name should be retained, as he distinguished it as a “variety 
with very small leaves ( microphyllus , Blox. MSS.)” in Kirby’s Flora 
of Leicestershire, page 41, 1850, from the road from Swepstone to 
Heather, Leicestershire. I have plants from this locality issued by 
Mr. Bloxam in his fasciculus, with which the Warwickshire plant is 
identical. I have observed the plant since 1872 in the Middleton 
district, where it occurs abundantly on heathy footways, and although 
it has increased in abundance during these years, it has never shown 
any tendency to variation. The typical R. rudis , as understood in 
former years, grows near this variety, and is markedly different in 
appearance. — J. E. Bagnall. 
R. Radula, W. and N., Baker. Between Apesdown and Row- 
ridge, Isle of Wight, 8th October, 1888 .— Charles Bailey. “ R. 
echinatus , Lindl.” — Dr. Focke. 
R. Radula, , W. and N., Baker. Between Cauldside and Glasserton, 
near Whithorn, Wigtonshire, 20th September, 1889. New County - 
record. — C harles Bailey. “R. Radula , W. and N. var.” — Dr. 
Focke. “ R. Radula var., remarkably few setae and aciculi.” — C. C. 
Babington. 
R. Radula , Weihe. Carey wood, Herefordshire, 10th July, 1889. 
I send this as a pretty and distinct-looking variety of R. Radula. 
The long narrow panicle, with broad single, often three-lobed, leaflets, 
give it a marked appearance. It is scattered over some two or three 
miles of wood and hedge, and keeps its characters well. — A ugustin 
Ley. “Yes.” — C. C. Babington. 
R. Bloxamiana, Coleman. Near Hartshill, Warwickshire, Sept., 
