2 2 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OK THE BRITISH ISLES. 
under the name Alectorolophus, a genus which Haller described in the 
‘Enumeratio Stirp. Helv.,’ii., 623 (1742), and which was also adopted 
by Moench in the ‘Methodus’of 1794. K- minor is our common 
British plant, and at Llanberis I collected it from the lake margin to 
about loco feet above sea-level; but I did not then see it above 2000 
feet. The plant which I described as R. Crista-ga/li, var. a?igustifo/ius, 
Gren. and Godr., in my ‘ Berkshire Flora,’ is to a great extent, if not 
entirely, the plant which Schur, in the ‘Enum. Plant. Transs.,’ 512, 
called R. stenophyllus \ and this has a wide range in Great Britain, from 
West Ross south to Berkshire, and in Ireland from Westmeath, whence 
the Rev. W. R. Linton and Mr. H. C Levinge distributed it as var. 
fa/lax, to Co. Cork, where I gathered it in 1890. This is the plant 
which was distributed by Mr. F. J. Hanbury from Tain, East Ross, in 
1890, under the name R. jnajor, but he was afterwards inclined to 
refer it to a variety of R. Crista-galli. I have not seen Grenier and 
Godron’s type of angustifolius^ but it is not unlikely that it is synony- 
mous with R. stenophyllus. See ‘Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist.,’ 1901, 177. — 
G. Claridge Druce. “ Dr. von Sterneck’s determination on the 
label is ‘A lectoro/ophus (Ehrh.) Wimm.’ In his ‘Monograph’ 
(p. 12) he gives 1747 as the date of Haller’s name; this, however, 
would be antedated by Fistu/aria, L. (1735) if the year 1753 were 
not adopted as a starting-jinint. Allioni was the first to revive 
Alectorolophus (1785); which is adopted by Sterneck in preference to 
Rhinanthus, L. (1753), on the ground that the latter is an aggregate 
genus; here, I feel sure, our British authorities will not follow 
him.”— Ed. 
Rhinanthus Crista-galli., L., var. stenophyllus., Schur ? Downs 
above Sutton, v.-c. 13, W. Sussex, 3rd August 1901. — E. F. Linton. 
Also sent, without a name, from the same station, by E. S. Marshall. 
(No. 2584). “Determined by Dr. von Sterneck as ‘yf/. stenophyllus 
(Schur), Sterneck.’ This is the plant referred to above by Mr. Druce; 
Schur, however, described it as R. minor., var. stenophyllus (1866), not 
as a species. Older varietal names are R. ?ninor, 7, angustifolius, Koch 
(1844), and / 3 , angustifolius., Gren. and Godr. (1850); but these will 
fall, as there is a species named R. angustifolius by Gmelin in 1806. 
The plant so abundant on heaths near Tain, now placed here by 
Sterneck, was thought by Mr. Hanbury and myself to be a distinct 
species when we found it in 1890; Prof. Haus.sknecht wrongly deter- 
mined it as R. tnajor., and Prof. Lange afterwards named it R. minor., 
Ehrh., var. angustifolius, Koch, which turns out to be correct.” — Ed. 
Afentha ruhra, S>m.? Se[)tember 1901, in some quantity, distri- 
buted over a mile of bank of the River Cynon, in v.-c. 42, Breconshire, 
within three or four miles of Aberdare. It attains considerable size, and 
shews the two forms which corres]3ond to the rivalis and paludosa 
forms of M. sativa, as per specimens herewith. The breadth of the 
upper bracts, in comparison with their length, is very marked. It 
seems to agree fairly well with specimens of M. rubra, but expert 
opinion must decide its identity. Its origin is doubtful. It may have 
