REPORT FOR 1896. 
5 T 7 
G. Benson and W. H. Painter. “ Certainly the plant described 
under this name by Mr. Ley in ‘Journ. Bot.,’ 1894, 143. At that 
time we were agreed in considering it a form intermediate between 
R. infestus and R. Borreri, and also in thinking it best placed as a 
variety under the latter. I should now prefer allying it with R. 
infestus.” — W. M. R. 
R. radu/a, Weihe; type, W. M. Rogers. Hedge in the cross-road 
from Aird to Ballyallaght, near the Giant’s Causeway, Antrim, 13th 
July 1896. — Charles Bailey. “I have not before seen quite the 
typical plant from Ireland.” — W. Moyle Rogers. 
R. rcidida , Weihe ; var. anglicanus, Rogers. Black Down and 
Fair Hazel, near Uckfield, E. Sussex, July and August 1896. — E. H. 
Farr. “So named by me for Mr. Farr; but the panicles are 
exceptionally weak, as if from plants gi owing in poor dry land.” — 
W. M. R. 
R. podophyllus, P. J. Muell. Longdon, Salop, July 1896. — R. de G. 
Benson and W H. Painter. “ I think a form of the variable R. 
podophyllus, allied to R. mucronatus, Blox, and R. melanoxylon, 
Muell.' and Wirtg.”— W. M. R. 
R. echinatus, Lindl. Shifnal, Salop, 24th August 1896. — W. H. 
Painter. “Yes.” — W. M. R. 
R. rudis, W. and N. Woods, Herefordshire: (1) Dulas, 25th 
June 1896; and (2) Bishopswood, 25th July 1896. — Augustin Ley. 
“ Yes.”— W. M. R. 
R. Babingtonii, Bell-Salt. Roadside, Horsham, Sussex, July 
1896, and St. Leonards, West Sussex, 22nd July 1896. — Jas. W. 
White. “ Good characteristic specimens of this species, which is 
widely distributed and often very abundant in S. E. England.” — 
W. M. R. 
R. mutabilis, Genev.; var. nemorosus , Genev. Woods, near 
Presteign, Herefordshire, nth and 12th August 1896. Abundant at 
many stations in the neighbourhood of Presteign, Herefordshire, where 
it was discovered this year by Rev. E. F. Linton and myself. — 
Augustin Ley. “A plant not easily named from dry specimens 
alone. The resemblance to the Surrey and Sussex R. mutabilis 
(though not to the Devon var. nemorosus ) is no doubt considerable. 
There are also features recalling R. Babingtonii. And yet, after a 
careful examination of these specimens, I believe that they will all go 
best under R. Borreri, Bell-Salt., as a strong form with more or 
less reflexed fruiting sepals. The stem especially — so strongly and 
unequally armed and glandular in places, though nearly eglandular 
and with subequal prickles elsewhere — is essentially that of the 
Ezregit, and (together with the leaves and panicle) best suits R. 
Borreri.” — W. M. R. 
