REPORT FOR 1 895. 
489 
H. etiprepes, F. J. Hanb. Cliffs of the Brecon Beacons, 9th 
and loth July, 1895. Name confirmed by Mr. Hanbury. Abundant 
both at Craig Gledsiau and other stations in this range. Only seen 
on the old red sandstone. — Augustin Ley. 
H. ? First thought by me, and assented to by Mr. Hanbury, 
as H. Adlerzii^ Almq. ; but seen afterwards by both of us to be 
different from this. Mr. Hanbury subsequently suggested H. 
sciaphilum, Uech., but if so, then surely a very marked variety, 
deserving a varietal name. Cliffs of the Brecon Beacon range, 9th and 
loth July, 1895. Name confirmed by Mr. Hanbury. This is a 
beautiful and very distinct hawkweed, gathered by me at five different 
stations on the Beacon range, one of them on limestone, the rest on 
sandstone. Most abundant on a wooded cliff called Craig Du 
(sandstone).— Augustin Ley. 
H. diaphanum, Fr., var. cacuminum^ Ley. Cliffs, Brecon Beacon 
range, 9th and loth July, 1895. Name confirmed by Mr. Hanbury. 
I have seen this plant in several new stations, both in the mountain 
cliffs and in the river valleys of the Brecon Beacons. I have the 
concurrence of Mr. Hanbury in suggesting that this plant should be 
removed from H. diaphanuin^ Fr., and placed as a variety under H. 
argenteum, Fr. After a good many years’ careful observation of H. 
cacummum, both as a wild plant and under cultivation, I believe this 
to be its natural position. — Augustin Ley. 
AT. rigidum, Hartm., var. serpentinum, F. J. Hanbury. Root from 
Hatterel hills, Herefordshire. Cult. Sellack, 2nd July, 1895. Passed by 
Mr. Hanbury. The plant loses most of its leaf spots, and becomes 
larger under cultivation. — Augustin Ley, 
Ca?npa?iula ?' 0 fu 7 i difolia L , forma. Limestone, S. of Lough Mask, 
Co. Mayo, Ireland, 15th July, 1895. A pretty and distinct looking 
plant when growing. Mr. H. Groves writes to me : — “ The lesson 
of these specimens seems to me that leaf characters are of very little 
value in this species. The larger specimens seem to answer fairly 
well to var. lancifolia of Mertens and Koch.” d’o myself the question 
of size appears of small importance, depending as it does upon greater 
or less moisture, at any rate in the present case. — Edward S. Marshall. 
“ Growing the various forms side by side, under equal conditions, 
seems to be the only means of really finding out whether they be 
merely states due to situation, or varieties. I suspect that a very 
consideralile number of our catalogue varieties would, if subjected to 
this test, di.sappear from the lists of those who discriminate between 
the state and the variety. I have gathered similar forms in Surrey, 
near Flaslemere, and elsewhere \ but have doubted whether any are 
really varieties.” — W. H. Beeby. 
Aloneses grandiflora, Gray. Rothiemurchus Forest, Easterness, 
under Scotch firs. June, 1892. — A. Somerville. 
