THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUE OF THE BRITISH ISLES. 
Rubus rudis, W. and N. Westridge Wood, W. Gloucester, 13th July 
1898. New to the vice-county. — Jas. W. White. “Yes.” — W. M. R. 
R. pallidus, W. and N. Builth, Breconshire, 9th August 1898. — 
Augustin Ley. “Seen in a fresh state by Rev. W. Moyle Rogers, 
and accepted by him.” — A. L. 
R. rosaceus^ W. and N., var. infecu 7 idns^ Rogers. Benthall Edge, 
Salop, August 1896. — W. H. Painter. pallidus^ W. and N. 
(non Bab.).”— W. M. R. 
R. rosaceus, W. and N., var. infecundus, Rogers. Longridge Fell, 
West Lancashire, 6th July 1898. — J. A. Wheldon. “Rightly named, 
I suppose ; but the pieces were collected too early in the season to 
show the characteristic features of the variety.” — W. M. R. 
R. Purchasianus, Rogers. Sellack, July and September 1898. — 
Augustin Ley. “From the bushes from which the supply was 
drawn for the ‘Sets of British Rubi.’” — A. L. “Yes.” — W. M. R. 
R. adornatus, P. J. Muell. Verwood, Dorset, 28th August 1891. — 
E. F. Linton. “Yes.”— W. M. R. 
R. Koehleri, vox. pallidus, 'S>a.h., forma (W. M. Rogers). Silverdale, 
W. Lancashire, 27th July 1898. — J. A. Wheldon. “Strong R. 
pallidus, Bab. (non W. and N.).”— W. M. R. 
R. cognatus, N. E. Br. St. Leonard’s Forest, Sussex, 22nd July 
1898. — J. W. White. “From the same bushes that furnished a 
former supply to the Club. See ‘Report,’ 1896, p. 518. The very 
broad, imbricate white petals of this plant form a handsome bowl- 
shaped corolla, which does not recall that of any other species known 
to me. This feature should be worth noting in descriptions.” — J. W. W. 
“Though it still seems to me impossible to separate this St. Leonard’s 
Forest plant from the Surrey R. cognatus, N. E. Br., many of the 
specimens now sent are even less conspicuously Koehlerian than those 
collected by Mr. White in 1896 (see ‘Report’ for that year); and the 
special feature to which he calls attention — the very broad, imbricate 
petals — is, so far as my experience of the variety goes, quite abnormal. 
In Surrey, where the plant is locally abundant, the petals seem to be 
always narrow, distant, and rather small. In several of Mr. White’s 
1898 specimens the panicle armature and glandular development are 
very exceptionally weak, and quite unlike that of R. Koehleri, and these 
must not be held to represent var. cognatus satisfactorily.”— W. M. R. 
R. hirtus, W. and K., sp. coll. Mains Wood, Herefordshire, 26th 
July 1898. — Augustin Ley. “Dried specimens of this plant were seen 
by Rev. W. Moyle Rogers in 1896, and named by him as above, and 
I have no further information to give upon it. The present specimens 
have not been seen by him ; but I am clear that they represent the 
same plant.” — A. L. “ I know very little about R. hirtus, W. and K., 
and its varieties. This Mains Wood plant somewhat recalls the R. 
