270 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES. 
is from R. hederaccus^ L. ; I should not think anyone who knew 
R. lutarius would pass it by for that species. Messrs. H. and J. 
Groves have seen and passed some of Clement Reid’s and of this 
gathering. Vide, ‘ Journ. Bot.,’ 1907, p. 452. — C. C. Vigurs. 
Also sent by S. H. Bickham. 
R. hederaceus, L., var. omiophyllus (Ten.). Roadside pool 
a mile south-east of Newquay, West Cornwall, v.-c. i, i6th and 
2ist June 1907. Messrs. Groves say — “In the direction of omio- 
phyllus, but not the extreme form.” The plants were rooted near 
the edge of the pool, and the stems floating for at least two feet ; 
the flowers were few and small. — C. C. Vigurs. I believe so; 
but is this anything more than a luxuriant, submerged state 1 I 
doubt it. — E. S. M. 
R. acris, L., var. tomophyllus, Rouy et Fouc. =^. tomophyllus, 
Jord. {pro specie'). Pastures about Failand and Portbury, N. 
Somerset, July 1907. My friend Cedric Bucknall has joined me 
in a diligent endeavour to identify the forms of R. acris that grow 
about Bristol, with the idea of arranging them under the segregates 
described by Jordan and other continental botanists. Many gather- 
ings have been made in ev'^ery kind of situation, with care to secure 
representative roots, leaves and fruit, d’he specimens have been 
repeatedly examined and compared with descriptions, and also 
with such collections — by no means complete — as are contained 
in our National Herbaria. The result of this work — chiefly under- 
taken by my friend — stated shortly, is that we cannot consider any 
of the variations worthy to rank as distinct species. Of ‘ sub- 
species ’ I say nothing, for I have never been able to form a mental 
picture of that entity. As happens with other groups of critical 
plants, our British forms of R. acris cannot often be precisely 
collated with those known to grow on the continent. A few 
certainly agree fairly well with one or other of them, and a larger 
proportion can be named more or less uncertainly ; but in the 
majority of cases puzzling cross-affinities are found to obtain, so 
that the plants cannot be allotted to any named variety, and some- 
times not even to a particular section. The best that can be said 
of many of these tomophyllus specimens is that they are nearer 
to this than to anything else. Although sometimes classed as 
a secondary form under Boneanus, in its extreme state this plant 
is as far removed from the latter as from either of the other 
segregates. — James W. White. ' Yes, well marked ; but would 
it not be belter to subordinate it to R. Borccanus as var. tomophyllus 
(Jord.) Towns., as was done by Mr. Townsend in ‘Journ. Bot.’? 
R. Boneanus and tomophyllus are connected by many intermediate 
forms, and are not even subspccifically distinct. — J. A. Wheldon. 
‘Lon. Cat.,’ Ed. X., gives it as R. acris, L., var. Boneanus (Jord.), 
