468 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES. 
occur, I regard it as a matter of opinion and not of fact. Mr. 
Somerville has shown me a plant with rooting stem from Loch Insh, 
gathered on the same day ; but the plants sent do not show the 
character.” — W. H. Beeby. 
Fapaver hybridum, L. Colwyn Bay, Denbighshire, July, 1895. — 
Mv H. Painter. New County record. 
Film aria pallidiflora, Jord. or F. confusa, Jord. Colwyn Bay, 
Denbighshire, July, 1895. — W H. Painter. “Not F. confusa \ 
probably weak F. pallidifloraP — H. and J. Groves. New County 
record. 
Barbarea intermedia^ l^oreau. Shirley, Derby, 17th May, 1895. 
The same plant as was commented on in ‘ B. E. C. Rep.’ 1889, 
p. 244, and 1890, p. 283. (h'owing here, this plant becomes more 
luxuriant, and the pods are somewhat less adpressed to the rachis. It 
is a plant of cultivated ground, not of brookbanks and waysides as 
B. vulgaris is ; its upper leaves are pinnatifid, its petals are less than 
twice as long as the sepals, its pod is short pointed. Specimens 
agreeing very closely with my plant were gathered in Surrey by Messrs. 
Marshall and Wolley Dod, and confirmed as intermedia by Svante' 
Murbeck, but pronounced to be B. vulgaris in the ‘ Rep. of the 
Watson dull,’ 1893-4, and 1894-5, Appendix. So that there seems 
some variance as to this species between British and Eoreign connois- 
seurs of the genus. — Wm. R. Linton. “Among some Barbareas of 
Mr. Marshall’s, which I sent some time ago to Docent Murbeck, 
there were several which were named by him B. intermedia. 'Fhe 
plant mentioned by Mr. Linton is no doubt the one from a bank near 
'Phursley, Surrey ; this much resembles Mr. Linton’s plant, the others 
do not. The Shirley specimens now .sent are immature, and descrip- 
tions of the fruiting raceme are scarcely applicable to plants in that 
condition, because the relative proportions of the pods change greatly 
as they ripen. I do not see the affinity with B. vulgaris, and think 
that this plant differs chiefly from our ordinary B. preecox when in a 
similar stage of growth, in the pods not being incurved. Barbareas, 
however, seem to be liable to aberrations of this sort, and I think that 
ripe fruit will probably show Mr. Linton’s plant to be a form of B. 
prcBcox. As the latter plant is still cultivated, it is very likely that 
there are several forms of it of garden origin. Besides this, Jordan 
described three species which are now treated as varieties in Camus’ 
‘ Catalogue.’ ” — W. H. Beeby. 
Arabis petrcea, Lam., var. liispida, DC. Larig Pass, at 2,500 feet, 
Cairnagorms, v.c. 96, 21st July, 1892. Mr. Ar. Bennett says (24th 
January, 1896), “Yes, 1 think your Arabis petrcea may go to the var. 
hirta, Koch, ‘ Syn,’ Ed. 2 p. 44. There seems some doubt whether 
this is De Candolle’s hispida.” — A. Somerville. 
Arabis perfoliata, Lam. Milford, Surrey, 4th May, 1895. These 
specimens are sent in order to show the spring rosette of root-leaves, 
which are usually quite withered by the time that the plant is in full 
— Edward S. Marshall. 
