370 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES. 
Dr. H. Dingier writes : “ villosa group : but I am sceptic if really 
var. recondita (Puget).” This is the rose which was sent to M. 
Sudre. Of the other, which appears to me identical with No. i, Dr. 
Dingier writes: “Seems to me a form of the tomentosa group, 
perhaps near to R. oniissa.’'' Both plants have the curved peduncle, 
and the fruit with disk O, characteristic of R. mollis^ Sm. \ botli 
have abundant sub-foliar glands, and therefore work out as R. 
recondita. Pug., according to my scheme. 1 regret that I could not 
obtain more numerous specimens. — .A,. Ley. Not R. recondita, 
Pug., which is a plant with large parallel-sided leaflets, just like those 
of R. pomifera, but much more glandular. Its short peduncles, and 
rather short and only spreading-erect considerably pinnate se])als 
indicate to me the R. Shcrardi (i.e. oniissa) grouj) ; but I can 
suggest no precise name. — A. H. W.-l). Certainly not var. 
recondita, Puget ; and very different from the Scottish form ot 
mollis, which Mr. Ley considers to be the same variety. I agree 
with Dr. Dingler’s opinion, which is practically the same as that of 
Major Wolley-Dod. Observation of the bush at the full maturity of 
the fruit would show whether or not it really belongs to the oniissa 
group, i.e., whether the sepals persist until the fruit is fully ripe. — 
Vv. Barclay. 
Rosa ? Craig Cille (limestone), Breconshire, 3 July igo8. 
Thorns long, quite straight, very few ; petals ciliate. — A. Ley. 
R. pomifera,\\o.xxm.,\'xx. Deseg.” — M. SuDRE. Form 
of the group villosa; but not R. poniifera, Herrm.” — Dr. H. 
Dingler. a mollis form, considerably on the poniifera side ; 
and I think probably R. Grenierii, De'segl., which is ranked under 
R. poniifera by continental botanists. — A. H. ^V.-l). This is neither 
R. poniifera nor its variety Grenierii, Dese'g., but simply a form 
of R. mollis, Sm. It differs from the next in having larger leaves, 
shorter peduncles and a much more globose calyx-tube. 1 have 
seen R. mollis with larger leaves, though not quite so large as that 
mentioned by Mr. Baker (‘ Mon.,’ p. 2 1 3), which had a leaf 6.( in. long 
with a terminal leaflet in. by 2 in. — \V. Barclay. 
R. mollis, vSm., var. Grenierii, Deseg. ? Dyflryn Crawnon 
(limestone), Breconshire: at about 1,700ft., rSth July and 24th 
Sept. 1908. Leaves without sub-foliar glands ; petals ciliate. 
“ A^ mollis, Sm., variety.” — Dr. H. Dingler. d'his form of 
R. mollis produces quite small narrow-necked fruit ; the petals 
are yellow at the base, answering, in this respect, to the de- 
scription of var. Grenierii (Deseg.) : but Mr. Barclay informs me 
that my plant does not agree with this either in fruit or in the 
shape of the leaflet. — A. Ley. Not identical with, though hardly 
separable from the Craig Cille R. Grenierii plant. 'Phe leaflets are 
rather unusually narrower and acute for any form of R. mollis, Sm. 
