452 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES, 
though the leaflets are eelandular beneath. — A. H. W.-Dod. The 
leaflets are glandular, though not very so (glands vary much in 
number in this form) ; the main prickles show the true curve of 
R. uncinata. — A, Ley. This is the first specimen I have seen of 
R. u?icinata, Ley. It does not show main prickles except three, 
two of which are not uncinate, and the third is doubtful. They are, 
however, stouter and broader based than in ordinary tomentosa 
forms. In one respect this specimen differs widely from Mr. Ley s 
description, i.e. the sepals are anything . but nearly simple. — W. 
Barclay, 
Rosa scabriuscula, Sm, [ref. No. 3395]. Wooded coast near 
Minehead, v.-c. 5, S. Somerset, Aug. 27, 1909. So named at the 
time by Major Wolley-Dod, confirmed by Sudre, who remarked 
that it appears also to correspond to R. tomentosa, var. ovoidea, 
Rouy. — E. S. Marshall, I should accept this as a variation of R. 
scabriuscula, Sm. I suppose the pressing has made the sepals 
appear more erect than they really are. — W. Barclay. 
Rosa scabriuscula, Sm., var. sylvestris (Lindl.). Marshbrook, 
Salop, v.-c. 40, July 19, and Sept. 3, 1909. The leaf glands vary 
in quantity, but are often numerous. In my judgment quite over 
the border of scabriuscula into sylvestris, to which it answers also in 
the shape and size of the leaflets. — A. Ley. Between var. sylvestris 
and R. scabriuscula, and perhaps rather nearer the former, which 
differs from scabriuscula chiefly in its more glandular and more 
glabrous leaflets, but they are also often somewhat smaller and 
narrower, and the prickles more numerous, stouter and more falcate. 
— A. H. W.-Dod, I agree that this comes under R. sylvestris, 
Lindl. — W. Barclay. 
Rosa inicrantha, Sm., \2oc. per mixta (Desegl.). [ref. No. 3396]. 
Coast near Minehead, v.-c. 5,S. Somerset, Aug. 27, 1909. Gathered 
w'ith Major Wolley-Dod. The same or a neighbouring bush had 
been so named last year by Prof. Dingier ; and the present gathering 
is confirmed by Sudre. It appears to be distinguished from type 
by the smooth fruit and prickly flowering branches. Hardly what 
has been understood by R. permixta, Deseglise, in England, I think 
— seems to be a slight variety. — E. S. Marshall. R. permixta is 
hardly separable from R. micrantha. Besides the two characters 
pointed out by Mr. Marshall, more glabrous leaflets are attributed 
to it. I have not been able to discover exactly what British authors 
have hitherto meant by R. permixta, but it has been assumed to be 
an Eglanteria form, not a micrantha. — .'\. H. W.-Dod, 
Rosa under lutetiana, Le'man. Sutton Walls, Herefordshire, 
v.-c. 36, Sept. 14, 1909. Leaves elliptic, narrowed at both ends 
