REPORT FOR 1 894. 
445 
Rubus n. sp. ? Abundant about Sandling Park, E. Kent, 
2nd August, 1894. Petals flesh coloured. Dr. Focke writes that 
“this reminds [one of] R. callianthus^ Focke, and R. Holandrei^ P. J. 
Muell, but not the same.” Rev. W. M, Rogers says: — “i?. dumetorum 
W. & N. One of the endless forms near var. iuberculatus, Bab.” It is 
remarkable for its bright red stems, and very neat rounded leaflets, and 
is when living very different looking from any dumetorum-ioxm. that I 
have hitherto seen. — E. S. Marshall. “ Seems to me not separable 
from R. iuberculatus^ Bab. as understood by Rev. W. H. Purchas and 
myself.” — W. R. L. 
R. Balfourianus, Blox. Walton, Liverpool, 17th July, 1894. A 
curious form with septenate leaves which appears to be frequent here. 
— J. A. Wheldon. “I am afraid this will not do for Balfourianus. 
It is nearer to R. sublustris, Lees, which frequently has septenate 
pinnate leaves ; but I believe it to be a hybrid.” — W. M. Rogers. 
R. ccesius, var. hispidus, Bab. ? Great Orme’s Head, N. Wales, 
August, 1894. Much more setose, than our common plant, but 
differing from hispidus as described by Prof. Babington, in having a 
bright purplish red stem. It may be a hybrid, but grew high up 
on Orme’s Head, with no bramble near except R. rusiicanus . — 
J. A. Wheldon. “Apparently var. hispidus^ W. & N. There 
is no mention of green stem in ‘ Rub. Germ.’ ” — W. M. Rogers. 
R. ccesius, var. umbrosus ? Sandhills, Crosby, Lancashire, July, 
1894. Clothing large tracts on the barren sandhills of Lancashire 
and Cheshire. — J. A. Wheldon. “Yes, aquaticus^ W. & N.” — 
W. M. Rogers. 
Dryas octopetala, Linn. Cnochan, W. Ross, June, 1894. Sent as a 
voucher for the occurrence of this plant in West Ross, It was originally 
recorded for the Cnochan rocks by Dr. Lightfoot in the ‘Flora Scotica,’ 
but there was considerable doubt as to the occurrence of Dryas in 
both counties. This year I was enabled to visit the rather remote 
locality and found Dryas in both West Ross and West Sutherland, on 
the Cnochan rocks, which are a fine range of limestone cliffs. An 
account of the plants found on the Ross-shire portion will be found in 
the ‘Transactions of the Botanical Society of Edinburgh,’ 1894, pp. 1 12- 
17 1 j and of the Sutherlandshire plants notices are given in the 
‘Annals of Scottish Nat. History,’ Jan, 1895. — G. Claridge Druce. 
Dryas octopetala, L. v. pilosa, Bab. Castle Taylor, Co. Galway, 
1 6th May, 1892. A very doubtful variety I fear. — H. C. Levinge. 
See ‘Report’ for 1892, p. 369. The sepals in the variety are longer 
and broader and clothed with more numerous black setae than in the 
type. The leaf characters scarcely differ from the type. — W. R. L. 
Fragaria . In a ditch bordering a plantation, which is part of 
a park, near Haines Hill, Hurst, Berkshire, June, 1894. The plants 
grew in a ditch by the side of a park near Ruscombe. Typical F. 
vesca was in the vicinity, and the gardens of the house were not a 
great distance away. At first I thought it might be depauperated F. 
chiloensis, but after a second visit I was more inclined to think it might 
