REPORT FOR 1892. 
373 
name should be cited as of Leers not of Leyser. Syme, it must be 
remembered, described his Bakeri as a variety of the subspecies G. 
elatum^ Thuillier. — G. C. Druce. 
Galium Molluqo^ L., var. Bakeri, Syme. Ufton Wood, Warwick, 
August, 1891. — H. 13romwich. “ In diffuseness of the panicles and 
straggling habit, this seems to accord with Bakeri, but the leaves are 
lanceolate, not ‘ strap shaped,’ or ‘ linear strap shaped,’ as described 
by Syme. Some specimens distributed in 1878 by Mr. Cunnack 
from the station, given by Mr. Bromwich, have the leaves oblanceo- 
late on the main stem, and obviously cannot be Syme’s plant. The 
plant, without a name, distributed by Mr. Bolton King, from ‘ Old 
Windsor,’ in 1879, seems to me to much more accord with Baker’s 
description, that is a plant having somewhat intermediate characters, 
but perhaps better placed to the former on the whole. The leaves, 
however, of Mr. B. King’s plant are recurved, and Mr. Baker does 
not say they are so in his plant.” — Arth. Bennett. 
G. sylvestre, Pollich, var. nitidulum (Thuill.) Sulham, Berks, 
August, 1891. Probably this should be called var. Bocconi {G. 
Boccone, All. ‘FI. Ped.’ i. 624), Coss. et Germ., ‘FI. Par.’ 446, 1861. 
— G. C. Druce. 
G. palust 7 'e,G.,vxx. elongahwi (Presl.) Jouldern’s Ford, Berks, 
July, 1891. — G. L. Druce. 
G. palusire, L., var. Wither ingii (Sm.) Boat of Garten, Easterness, 
August, 1891. — G. C. Druce. 
G. uliguiosum, L. Childswell Hill, Berks, July, 1880. This 
habitat was mentioned by Dillenius about 1730.— G. C. Druce. 
Solidago afigiistifolia. Buddon Wood, on syenite, Leicestershire, 
5th August, 1892. In the ‘Report’ for 1891, the Editor 
remarks that the specimens which I sent from Lancashire and 
Leicestershire are “the plant figured in ‘English Botany’ as var. 
gefiuma, not angustifolial’’ This is true, but the figure does not agree 
with the description in the text, and both figure and text differ from 
the description in the ‘Student’s Flora.’ My specimens are the var. 
angustifolia. Gaud., as given in the ‘Student’s Flora.’ I send a 
farther supply of Leicestershire specimens. — F. T. Mott. Mr. J. 
Gilbert Baker says: “typical Vi?gaureaP As Mr. Mott says, the 
description of the varieties of Solidago Virgaurea differ from the plate 
which is supposed to do duty for the typical plant, i.e., var. vulgaris, 
Koch, which is said to have “upper leaves lanceolate .... entire.” 
In the plate they are represented as distinctly serrate. In the 
‘ Student’s Flora ’ the leaves are said to be “ all oblong obovate, 
(juite entire ” in the type plant, which, if they answer to the description, 
would be the var. latifolia, of Koch, while the var. angustifolia, of 
Gaudin, Hooker says, has the leaves oblong lanceolate, upper 
narrower, often serrate. Babington says the var. angustifolia, Koch, 
has all the leaves lanceolate, which would exclude Mr. Mott’s plant. 
Gaudin’s own description in ‘FI. Helv.,’ v. 316 (1829), is “ folds 
angustioribus obscurius serratis,” which is based on the Vbga-aiirea 
angustifolia, C.B.P. and Hall, Helv. 69b. In the ‘Enum. Stirpes 
Helv.’ 729 (1742), Haller says: “var. b., quce videtur in Anglia et 
