REPORT FOR 1 892. 
353 
name, antedates Scopoli’s genus Neckeria (which only differs by a 
single letter from the Moss genus Neckera), and has already had 
named under it Capnoides lutea^ Gartn. = Corydalis liitea, DC. and 
Capnoides solida, Mdnch. This plant should be Capnoides bulbosa . — 
G. C. Druce. 
Fumaria confusa, Jord. Railside, near Oxford, but in Berkshire, 
July, 1892. This is a new county record, but the plant is rather 
a casual there, although I have noticed it for the last four or five 
years. — G. C. Druce. “ I should say correctly named.” — Arth. 
Bennett. “ Yes.” — H. and J. Groves. 
F officinalis^ L. Newbury, Berks. A large rampant glaucous 
form which, from descriptions, cannot be far away from F. media, 
Lois, of which, however, I have seen no authentic specimens. — G. C. 
Druce. F. officinalisP- — H. and J. Groves. 
F. paruiflora, Lamk. Lowbury, Berks, June, 1886. — G. C. Druce. 
Mathiola sinuaia, R. Br. Cobo Bay, Guernsey, June, 1877. — 
G. C. Druce. 
Nasturtium officinale, R. Br., var. microphyllum (Bonng.) Reichb. 
Wet roadside, near Wimborne, Dorset, June, 1892. — E. F. Linton. 
“ A larger plant than authentic examples, and the leaflets less 
obviously subpetiolate than in the true plant.” — Arthur Bennett. It 
comes under the N. officinale, var. prcecox, S. F. Gray, which is based 
on N. aqiiaticum foliis minoribus prcecocius. See ‘Ray. Syn.,’ Ed. iii., 
301. It agrees fairly well with Dale’s specimen, and with the figure 
No. 4360, vol. ii. of Reichenbach’s ‘ leones FI. Helv. et Germ.’ 
except that in the latter the terminal lobe of the lower leaves is not 
very dissimilar in size, while in Mr. Linton’s specimens they are 
distinctly larger. The generic name. Nasturtium, of Robert Brown 
is clearly antedated by Scopoli’s Roripa. The name would therefore 
more correctly be Roripa Nasturtium, Beck. ‘FI. Nied. Ost. ii.,’ 463, 
var. prcecox (Gray.)— G. C. Druce. 
Barbarea intermedia, Boreau. Cloverfield near Benham, and 
also near Newbury, Berks, June, 1892. — G. C. Druce. “Just the 
plant we get near here on the weald clay.” — E. S. Marshall. “ I do 
not think it belongs to intermedia but I am not able to name it, 
though I have gathered the same plant in Hayling Island and in Surrey, 
but always doubting where to place it.” — Arth. Bennett. “ I should 
call this B. vulgaris, R. Br.” — W. R Linton. “ This is not a 
satisfactory plant. The leaves suggest B. intermedia, but the beak is 
not very short, and the flowers are large.” — H. and J. Groves. 
Arabis petrcea, Lamk., var. grandifolia, Druce. Ben Laoigh, 
Argyll, August, 1889. This plant in cultivation keeps quite distinct 
from the Cairngorm plant, and is, I believe, a sub-species. The 
Cairngorm plant is very difficult to keep alive in our Oxford air, but 
this thrives and seeds freely. Slugs eat too readily the Cairngorm, 
but neglect this plant. It flowers eailier, but this may be from its 
bearing the climate better. I have written the name in the customary 
manner, but there appears to be great doubt if Lamarck’s plant is the 
same as the British one. In the ‘ Enc. Methodique,’ vol. i. p. 221, 
Lamarck describes his plant as being common in the Auvergne, where 
