nee tare ane aera ce

THE BOTANICAL SOCIETY AND EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE. BRITISH: ISLES.

REPORT FOR 1914,

OF THE

BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB

(CONVENIENTLY ABBREVIATED REP. B.E.C.) BY THE

EDITOR AND DISTRIBUTOR,

Ae CORS TORPHINE, “B.Sc:

VOL. IV. PART II.

PUBLISHED BY V T. BUNCLE & CO., MARKET PLACE, ARBROATH.

November 1915. \ | ee S45

PRICE 3s 6p. wiOT\4

aA

THE SOCIETY FOR THE PROMOTION OF NATURE RESERVES.

President—Turt Rieut Hon. JAMES W. LOWTHER, P.C., M.P., F.R.G.S. (Speaker of the House of Commons ).

COUNCIL

Dr. I. BayLty BALFour, M.D., F.R.S | Sir Herpert E, MAXWELL, Bart., F.R. 8. Sir Epwarp H. Busx, M.A., LL.B. | *E, G. B. Mrape-WALDo. Sir FRANCIS DARWIN, M.B., 'B.BS. | *Hon. E. S. Monraau, M.P. Dr. F. DAWTREY DREWIIT, M.D. | Siv Danreu Morris, K.C.M.G., M.A. *G. CLARIDGE DRUCE. *Professor F. W. OLivER, D.Sc., F.B.S. Professor J. BRETLAND FARMER, F.R.S. | BARL OF PitymMoutH, P.C.; C.B. L. FLETCHER, F.R.S. | Professor E. B. Pouuron, F.R.S.

J.C. F. Fryer, M.A. |. Lieut.-Col.,Sir DAvip Pratn, F.R.S.

nih Hon. Sir EDWARD Grey, Bart., K.G,, M.P. *Hon. N. C. RotHSscHILD.

Rt. Hon. Viscount HALDANE, P.C., F.R.S. *W. H. St QUINTIN.

Rt. Hon. L. V. Harcourt, P.C., M.P. Rk. F. ScHARFF.

T. F. Husspanp, I.S8.0. Professor A.-G. TANSLEY, M.A. F, E. LEMON, M.A. A. B. R. TREVOR-BAYTYE.

Lorp Lucas, P.C.

Hon. Secretartes—*W. R. OGILVIE-GRANT.

*Hon. F. R. HENLEY. Ex officio. : Hon. Treasurer—*C. E. Faean, 1.8.0. Hon. Solicitor—J. Artaur DAwsEs, M.P.

*Members of the Executive Committee.

In view of the dangers which at present seriously threaten our indigenous fauna, and flora with extinction, the above Society has been formed. with the following objects :—

I. To collect: and collate information as to areas of land in the United Kingdom, which retain their primitive conditions and contain rare and local species liable to extinction owing to building, drainage and dis- afforestation, or in consequence of the cupidity of collectors.

All such information to be treated as strictly confidential.

II. To prepare a scheme showing the areas which in the opinion of the Society should be acquired as Nature Reserves.

III. To acquire such areas and, if desirable, to hand them over to the National Trust under such conditions as may be necessary.

IV. To preserve for posterity as a national possession some part at least of our native land, its fauna, flora, and geological features.

V. To encourage the love of Nature and to educate public opinion to a better knowledge of the value of Nature Study.

These objects are to be attained by means of the Press, by personal efforts, and by correspondence with local Societies and individuals.

The Society exacts no subscription from its members, who are elected by invitation of the Executive Committee. All interested in the objects here out- lined are invited to communicate with the Secretaries at the address given below, and those who are anxious to forward the aims of the Society can do so, not only by supplying the Executive Committee with information, but also (when asked to do so) by rendering financial assistance, however slight, for the purchase of any desired area, and by inducing their friends to do likewise. It may be pointed out that in the past the National Trust has been greatly assisted by Bi voluntary contributions.

Communications should be addressed to *‘ The Secretary, SOCIETY FOR THE Promotion oF Nature Reserves, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, 8. W.”

THE BOTANICAL SOCIETY

Pv EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

(VOL. IV. PART II).

RERORT POR FOr4

OF THE

BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB

(Conveniently Abbreviated for Citation REP. B.E.C.) BY THE

EDITOR AND DISTRIBUTOR,

io COnSTORPHINE, B.Sc.

The Subscription, 7s 6d per annum, and Non-Contributing Members’ Sub- scription of 5s per annum, become due on January 1, 1916, and should be sent to

G. CLARIDGE DRUCE,

YARDLEY LODGE, 9 CRICK ROAD, OXFORD.

Cheques for three or four years in advance would save much trouble and expense in postage.

Parcels for 1915 should be sent post paid, on or before 10th December 1915, to A. R. HORWOOD, Esg., MunicipaL Museum, LEICESTER.

The Distributors and Editors for 1916 will be W. H. PEARSALL, Esg., and/ D. LUMB, Esgq., DALTON IN FURNESS. vA

PRINTED BY T. BUNCLE & Co., ARBROATH.

November 1915.

. ‘ A 5 i) * = ¥ ear i" A t i y (a . o%: ~ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ a be ee , c x > se) ‘ : z , a} Cm, 4 ar a ug ra SL erecpalicnsra ieciecere: «29 daisy 6 Seb loyyneeian ime eid yma iNoN ehe Se Ale ; z; E * u S set ars a = : 4 ro v a <4 . ‘ ? 4 ’, age « Tae i as i as . { a , 3 SPaiM raha: SE , ~ ! , A . a 4 . + ‘ a ‘ . : 1 Per Car = U! é , / -@ ke ‘ we “ a i } hae te A eee 4 os a ea ne oe . : 4 ) , ' 1 ioe ‘ 7 ‘ dow » t i =f . Ae + a ’ bye ‘ . . 5 aie : yong oe ; om it ear ‘ r ) : ‘ ’ ' ‘ ' / ’ P The : J 5 r a er) : 10 ey. o uv is ‘i m ¢ey',

$Orb4 &

REPORT FOR 1914. 109

REPORT OF THE DISTRIBUTOR FOR 1914.

THE total number of plants sent in for distribution shows a reduction on the two previous years. This, however, is readily accounted for by the abnormal condition of the country—many of our members having had to devote themselves to more imperative work. The number of plants sent in was 6537, contributed by thirty - four members.

The specimens were on the whole well prepared and the rules of the Club fairly well adhered to. The critical genera were all well represented, the most noticeable increase being in the genus Lrophila. With regard to Yumaria, Mr Pugsley remarks ‘“ The plants were well dried, and the naming a great improvement on what obtained a few years ago.” There were also a large number of good specimens of our less critical plants, which would doubtless be much valued by the newer members. Our largest contributor was Mr Robinson, whose specimens showed much care in preparation. Mr Pearsall’s excellent specimens of Hydrilla were much appreciated.

The Rules of the Club have been reprinted, and I should like to direct the attention of the members to the remarks on the labelling of the specimens. At present the distributor receives with each packet of plants the requisite number of labels, but only one copy of the additional particulars and remarks of the collector regarding the plant. These remarks are generally printed in the Report. They are not, however, available until too late for the use of the experts who criticise the plant. This is obviously a great disadvantage, as the critic in his examination of the plant does not have before him facts as to abnormal conditions of growth or other details which might considerably influence his opinion, nor, when he is unaware of them, can he elucidate the sender’s difficulties or answer his questions. Therefore, it is very necessary for those contributors who have any remarks of import to make upon their plants to send a copy of these with each label, or at least to send a sufficient number of copies to supply the critics.

The Club is greatly indebted to the following botanists for critical notes on the specimens :—Mr E. G. Baker, Mr W. Barclay, Dr Drabble, Mrs Gregory, Mr J. Groves, Mr W. P. Hiern, Rev. E. F. Linton, ‘Dr C. E. Moss, Mr H. W. Pugsley, Rev. W. Moyle Rogers, Mr F. W. Stansfield, Dr Thellung, and Members of the Club whose names will be seen in the body of the Report.

R. H. CorsrorpPuHine, Editor of Report and Distributor for 1914.

HiuisipE Hovss, ARBROATH, Nov. 1, 1915.

110 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE

LIST OF PARCELS RECEIVED.

Adamson, R. S., B.A.

Bailey, Charles, 7. Sc., F.L.S. Barclay, W :

Barton, W. 0, M. an

Biekham, 8S. H:., 7.2.8., J.P. Britton, C. E.,

Brown, G. C.,

Chester, G., :

Comber, John, -/. P. ; Corstorphine, Mr and Mrs R. He Cryer, John,

Cumming, L., 1/7.A. is Druce, G. Claridge, I.A., J.P. Groves, J., F.L.S. in Hayward, Mice Ida M., F.L.S. Horwood, A. R.,

Jackson, A. Bere:

Johnston, Henry Halcro, Col. Little, J. E., IZA.

Lumb, D.,

Marshall, Bee E. i M. un FUL Ss

Pearsall, W. H..,

Riddelsdell, Pes ys War Mu. A. Rilstone, F.,

Robinson, F.,

Salmon, C. E., PL. 8.

Travis, W. G., ;

Vigurs, C. C., M.D.

Waddell, Rev. C. H., Waterfall, Charles, F.Z.S. Webster, Alfred, ... ee Wheldon, J. A., LS. .. White, J. W., #Z.S. un Wilson, A., /.LS., F.R.MetS. .

Total,

CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

No. of Specimens.

22 20 34 279 98 126 425 116 229 292 378 132 694 56 4]

REPORT FOR 1914. Uae ie hh

Thalictrum minus L., var. montanum. Dry bank, sandy soil, Tottington, v.-c. 28, July 23, 1914.—F. Ropinson. ‘So I should name

it.”—E. 8. MARSHALL.

Thalictrum majus Crantz. Hast Kennack Valley, June 19, 1914, and near Penhale, June 18 and August 12, 1914, both in the Lizard peninsula. ‘There can be no doubt, I think, that this plant is native in the Lizard district, though it seems strange that it should be there. I think the plant is correctly named, though, as far as I know, it has never been determined by any competent authority. Is 7. majus Crantz, of the Lond. Cat., ed. x., and Druce’s List = 7’. majus Sm. of Bab. Man., ed. ix., and = 7’. majus Jacq. mentioned by Mr Salmon in last year’s Report! The Penhale locality is a new one. Some of the plants in both places were more than four feet high. J am much indebted to Mr E. Thurston, C.I.E., for this and other Lizard plants. Coll. E. THurston; comm. C. C. Viegurs. ‘“I prefer to call this T. colliunum Wallr.”—E. F. Linton. ‘I have seen a similar plant on the rocky coast near Mullion, Not 7. majus. I should refer it to T. montanum Wallr.”—E.8.MarsHauy. “ Not a majus form, I should say. Is it not dwnense?”—C. E. Satmon.

Thalictrum alpinum L. In abundance on what is termed the ‘‘Sugar-Loaf Limestone,” Cronkley Fell, Teesdale, v.-c. 65, June 9, 1914. Altitude 2000 ft.—.J. Crymr.

Myosurus minimus L. Arable land near Madresfield, Great Malvern, v.-c. 37, May 7, 1914.—Coll. R. F. Townprow; comm. C. WATERFALL.

Ranunculus bulbosus L. Golf Links, Askam, v.-c. 69b, June 15, 1914. I think that this could not be anything but spontaneous. I thought the plant had “ flowered itself to death,” but it has recovered. —D. Lumps. “This seems to be the “ Ranunculus dulcis multiplex, Double wilde Crow-foot” figured in Johnson’s Gerard, 957 (1633), where one reads that it “hath of late beene brought out of Lancashire unto our London gardens, by a curious gentleman in the searching forth of simples, Mr Thomas Hesketh, who found it growing wilde in the towne fields of a smal village called Hesketh, not farre from Latham in Lancashire.’—-C. E. Satmon. “A form with double flowers; new to me.’—E. 8. Marsuauty. ‘Good examples of the ‘flore pleno’ form.”—G. C. Deuces. |

Ranunculus Flammula L., f£. minima Ar. Benn. Slacks in sand- hills, Freshfield, v.-c. 59, July 5, 1914.—W. G. Travis. “I have much the same thing from Holburn Head, Caithness. Only a state due to local conditions.”—E. 8. MarsHaut. “AR. Flammula L.”— G. C. Druce.

AY THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Ranunculus sardous Crantz. Wyke, Weymouth, v.-c. 9, July 14, 1914. Frequent round Weymouth, I believe; but this is a “new locality ” for the species. The flowers are much smaller than those of Rk. repens L., but of just about the same bright polished yellow. At the Lizard, the flowers I gathered there were of a lighter lemon- yellow. —H. J. RIDDELSDELL.

Ranunculus parviflorus L. Hedge bank, Upper Chase Road, Malvern, v.-c. 37, May 7, 1914.—C. WatrrFaLL. “ Yes, a very hairy form.”—G. C. DRucE. :

Ranunculus ? [Ref. No. 2791.] Near Cowbit, Lincolnshire, July 1912.—G. C. Druce. “ &. Baudotw.”—J. Groves. “ Cf. con- Jusus.”—W. P. Hizrn. ih

Ranunculus heterophyllus Weber. Pool on roadside between Great Malvern and Madresfield, v.-c 37, May 2, 1914.—C. WarerFaLt. “Yes. Carpels practically glabrous.”—J. Groves. “Is triphyllus.” —W. P. Hiern.

Ranunculus heterophyllus Bab. [Ref. No. 41.] Stagnant water, Watton, v.-c. 28, May 14, 1914.—-F. Ropinson. ‘“ &. heterophyllus Weber. Carpels with numerous strong bristles.’—J. Groves. ‘Is radians.” —W. P. Hiern.

Ranunculus heterophyllus Weber, var. triphyllus Wallr. Portbury marshes, N. Somerset, May 29, 1914.—J. W. Wurre. ‘Is radians.” —W. P. Hiern. “A&. heterophyllus. The carpels are bristly, whereas those of A. triphyllus Wallr. are described as ‘ glaberrimis nitidis.’ ” —J. GROVES.

Ranunculus heterophyllus Weber, var. submersus Hiern. Marsh ditch, Portbury, N. Somerset, June 3, 1902.—J. W. Wuirz. ‘Is trichophyllus.” —W. P. Hiern. ‘JI am doubtful about this. It has more rigid leaves than is usual in &. heterophylius submersus. The entirely undeveloped heads of carpels suggest hybridity. I do not think we can properly cite Hiern as the authority for var. swhmersus of &. heterophyllus, as in his paper on the group he treated the whole genus Batrachium as one species. Moreover, his form No. 30 submersus was not ranged under the head of 2. heterophyllus.”—J. GROVES.

Ranunculus peltatus Schrank, var. truncatus (Hiern). Birkdault, v.c. 69b, June 13, 1914. This grows in the same ditch as the form distributed last year | Ref. No. 380], and seems intermediate between it and var. truncatus.—W. H. Prarsatu. “ R. truncatus.”—W. P. Hiern. ‘ Yes, I suppose this curious plant must be so labelled, but I have never seen éruncatus with similar leaves.” —J. GROVES.

REPORT FOR 1914. 113

Ranunculus pseudo-fluitans Bab. In the River Ribble, near Preston, South and West Lancashire, v.-c. 59 and 60, July 1914. This is probably the plant recorded from about ten miles higher up the river in the Flora of Stonyhurst as R. fluitans Lam., “ not flower- ing” (see Plora of West Lancashire, p. 129). During this last dry summer flowers were freely produced near Preston, the river being

exceptionally low.—A. Witson. “My specimen is too meagre for determination ; fruit and floating leaves absent, and only one flower.” —H. 8S. Marsuwaut. ‘ From this specimen, I should have thought a

form of &. fluitans, but I should like to see more of it.”—J. Grovzs. “Cf. R. Bachii.”—W. P. Hiern. ‘“ This appears to be identical with the Batrachian Ranwnculus sent to the Club in 1904 by the same collector from the River Wharfe, W. Yorks, under the name of £. pseudo-fluitans Hiern. The latter plant was considered by Messrs Groves to be a small river form of the peltatus group. Examples of both gatherings agree with descriptions of 2. pseudo-flurtans except in the characters of robustness and the average length of the peduncles, and both curiously agree in the fact of being completely sterile! If this latter characteristic is not unusual, it would probably be as well to publish a description of this form as a new species.” —C. E. Brirron.

Ranunculus Baudotu Godr.? Brackish ditch inside sea wall be- tween Sidlesham and Pagham, W. Sussex, v.-c. 13, June 15, 1914.— J. E. Littte. ‘“&. Baudotu.’”—C. E. Brirron, J. Groves, and W. P. HIERN.

Ranunculus Baudotw Godr. Roose, v.-c. 69b, May 22, 1914. Very plentiful in brackish water near the coast.—W. H. PEearRsALt. ‘small form of this, - think.”—-K. 8. MarsHauu. ‘ Yes.”—J. Groves. “Cf. confusus.”—W. P. Hiern.

Aquilegia vulgaris L. Marsh, Carbrooke Fen, v.-c. 28, May 19, 1914.—F. Rosinson.

Papaver hybridum L. Near High Down, Hitchin, Herts, v.-c. 20, August 1, 1914.—J. E. Lrrrte.

Corydalis lutea DC. Newquay, Cardiganshire, May 1914.—J. W. WHITE.

Corydalis claviculata DC. Clophill, Beds, v.-c., 30, April 25, 1914. Not recorded by Abbot (Mlora Bedfordshire, 1798).—J. E. Lirtte. ‘Small specimens. It is a plant very responsive to con- ditions of shade or exposure. The var. minor R. & F. Flore de France, p- 188, from schistose soil, is only 4 to 12 cm. high. I have seen such on recently burnt commons. I found it at Woburn in 1874.”—G. C, DRvceE,

114 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Fumaria paradoxa Pugsley. Orig. near Reigate Hill, Surrey, 1912, Hort. Reigate, 1914. It is difficult to imagine a more beauti- ful Fumitory, when in a fresh state, than the one now distributed. It is a mystery how the plant reached the cultivated ground near the farm on Reigate Hill where I gathered it on June 16, 1912. Not far away were Thlaspi arvense, Lolium temulentum, and two or three plants of Hyoscyamus. Could the Fuwmaria have been accidentally introduced with potatoes from Cornwall?!—C. E. Satmon. “ Yes; I have rarely seen cultivated specimens of Humaria so satisfactory as

this.” —H. W. Puasiey.

Fumaria capreolata L., var. Babingtoni Pugsley. Blackhead, Co. Clare, June 1909.—G. C. Druce. “Showing no fruit, but no doubt correctly named.”—H. W. PuGstey.

Fumaria Borat Jord. [Ref. No. 1168.] Chobham, Surrey. May 31, 1914.—C. E. Brirron. “ Yes; under type, I believe.”-—E. S. MarsHatu. ‘‘ Correct; near Jordan’s type, but with rather small flowers and fruits. This isa rare plant in Surrey.”—-H. W. Puastey.

Fumaria ——! Odiham, Hampshire, July 1903. (See Keport 1903, p. 9.)—Coll. C. E. Paumer ; comm. G. C. Druce.

Pumaria Bastard: Bor. (Ff. confusa Jord.). Arable land near Llangollen, Denbigh, v.-c. 50, September 20, 1914.—C. WaTmrratt. “Yes. The sheet sent is var. hibernica Pugsley. Easily distinguish- able by its dark-tipped upper petal.” —H. W. Puastey.

Fumaria officinalis L., var.’ This appeared in great abundance in a ploughed field at Charlestown, Baildon, v.-c. 64, June 1, 1914.— J. Cryer. ‘A narrow-leaved form ; but I do not see the varietal character.” —-E. S. Marsnauyu. ‘The sheet sent is a floriferous, early flowering form of /. officinalis L., var. Wirtgent Haussk., but some of the fruits enclosed in the envelope are different from the majority, and appear to have come from a plant of /. officinalis type.” —H. W. PUGSLEY.

Barbarea verna Ascher. Garden weed, Colchester, v.-c. 19, May 23, 1914.—G. C. Brown. “ Rightly named.”—C. E. Saumon. ‘Yes ; very characteristic.” —A. B. Jackson.

Barbarea verna Ascher. Railway, Askam, v.-c. 69b, July 5, 1914. Woods gives as a character of this plant “auricles ciliate.” Is any member able to say whether this is constant and diagnostic? There were what seemed to me two plants growing together, and I feel cer- tain that I have failed to separate them ; in all probability I have paid too much attention to “ ciliate auricles.”—D. Luma. ‘“ No; this

REPORT FoR 1914. | 115

I should call B. intermedia Bor.”—C, E. Satmon. ‘ Looks right.”— EK. S. MarsHALtt.

Barbarea vulgaris Bor. Railway, Askham, v.-c. 69b, July 5, 1914. I have named this with some doubt. All these plants may possibly belong to the other set.—D. Lump. ‘“ 8. ontermedia Bor., I think, but specimens badly dried.”——A. B. Jackson. ‘Is 5. intermedia Bor.” — A. THELLUNG.

Barbarea vulgaris R. Br., var. campestris Fr. Nov. Fl. Suec., p. 205, 1828. Stiff clay soil on railway embankment between Alperton and Sudbury, Middlesex, May 22,1914. This, the commonest variety of B. vulgaris in Britain, is distinguished by its slightly spreading or secund pods, but it passes gradually into the var. arcuata Fr. (pods arcuate) on the one hand, and into var. sylvestris (pods adpressed) on the other.—A. B. JACKSON.

Arabis hirsuta Scop., var. Symond’s Yat, W. Glos, May 28, 1913. Of course only a slight variety, with the pods somewhat spreading. As a rule, the species has closely adpressed pods, even in shady woods ; the variety is not due, as it seems, to the presence of shade. There is a parallel variety in barbarea vulgaris. The form occurs also on the Great Doward, v.-c. 36. The sparseness of the hairs is probably due

to the less exposed conditions.—H. J. Rippeuspety. “I collected this (same place and date) and thought it untypical. No special name suggested so far.”—H. 8. Marswaty. “This seems nearest to var.

gracilescens (Jord.) R. & F. Fl. Fr. i., 216. Plante assez élevée (8—5 dem.) mais a tiges gréles flexueuses ; feuilles d’un vert clair, les caulin- aires tronquées ou légerement subcordées, lancéolées ou oblongues- lancéolées, acutiuscules, nombreuses, a 4 dents souvent saillantes ; siliques (25—35 mm.) étroitement linéaires, disposées en grappe allongée, lache. Ihave the same form from Wells, Somerset ; Culford, Suffolk.”—-G. C. Drucz.

Arabis scabra All. Clifton, W. Glos., v.-c. 34, April 27, 1914.— W. C. Barton.

Arabis alpina L. North side of the Cuchullins, Skye, June 1910. —G. C. Druce and T. H. Leacnu. This was from a different locality on the Cuchullins to that which was discovered by Mr H. Hart in 1887, and is, I believe, the second time it has been gathered in the British Isles. Mr Hart’s specimens, gathered on his wedding tour in the first week in July, are in fruit ; ours gathered in June are in good flower. The plant is very local and requires climbing to reach (2700—2800 ft. alt.), growing on damp rock ledges. Mr A. H. Evans and Mr T. H. Leach (my godson) were with me, and the latter was the first to spot the prize, for we were systematically working the

116 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

corrie in sections. We did not see it on Scur Alister, where it is believed Mr Hart originally found it.—G. C. Druce.

Arabis petrea Lam., var. hispida DC. Ben Hope, W. Sutherland, July 1907. This hispid variety of A. petreea from Ben Hope differs from the plant of the Cairngorms and Snowdon in having much larger flowers, in this point resembling my var. grandifolia from Ben Laoigh ; in fact, a few plants referable to that variety were found there. Mr Arthur Bennett referred my grandifolia to A. petrea, var. ambigua Fries Mantissa iii., 77; the vague definition “elatior, foliis radicali- bus lyrato-sinuatis caulinis subdentatis radice tenuiori” does not give the essential characters of the Ben Laoigh plant I designated var. grandifolia, which must stand for the Ben Laoigh plant. The var. ambigua Fries, A. ambigua DC. Syst. i., 231, is chiefly Siberian and Unalaskan and is not a perennial, and he makes no mention of size of leaves or flowers.—G. C. Druce.

Arabis glabra Bernh. (perfoliata Lam.). Dry heath amongst gorse, Barnham Common, v.-c. 28, August 22, 1914.—.F. Rosrnson.

Cardamine vmpatiens L. Seedlings. Occurs as a weed on several gardens in an allotment near Kettering, v.-c. 32, Jan. 17, 1914.— G. CHESTER.

Erophila. (Ref. No. 2041]. Fairford, Glos., April 1904. This is a not uncommon plant of our oolitic areas in Oxfordshire and ~ Gloucestershire, and is, I think, #. Ozanoni Jord. Diagn. 231, et Icones, t. 5, n. 17.—G. C. Druce. ‘Some specimens rather closely approach #. precox DC.”—H. 8. MarsHALt.

Erophila—— [Ref. No. 50]. Edge of salt marsh near Montrose, v.-c. 90, May 16, 1914.—R. and M. Corsrorpuine. “This is a form of £. majuscula Jord., and apparently is the Draba majuscula R. & F., var. occidentalis R. & F.=F. occidentalis Jord.”—C. E. Brirron. ‘“‘Depauperate /. stenocarpa I strongly suspect.”—E. 8S. MARSHALL.

Erophila ? [Ref. No. 56]. Roadside near Restennet, v.-c. 90, May 2, 1914.—R. & M. Corstorpuine. ‘I think there are two plants here. The bulk is nearly glabrous, the few hairs mostly simple. The silicle measurements and narrow leaves suggest placing it under Draba glabrescens, var. erratica Rouy et Fouc.”——J. A. WHELDON. “A peculiar little plant. Pods much reticulate, veined as they mature. Leaf surface nearly glabrous, except near the margins.”— K. 8. MarsHAL.t.

Erophila verna EK. Meyer. |Ref. No. 4]. Wall under trees, in a dip in the road from Hook Norton to Wigginton, Oxon, April 14,

REPORT FOR 1914. ‘117

1914. This bushy, much branched Hrophila occupied a section of the wall top, pretty much to the exclusion of everything else. Perhaps it should come under £. verna agg.—H. J. RippELspELL. ‘This seems to occupy an intermediate position between Z. precox and E. majus- cula, though considerably nearer the latter. I would name it £. obovata Jord.”—C. E. Brirron. “Petals large; pods broad, round- topped. Resembles what I have as British #. majuscula Jord.”— EK. S. Marswaty. ‘These come under F. precoa DC.”—G. C. DRUCE.

Erophiia verna Ki. Meyer, var. [Ref. No. 5]. Wall, fully exposed, between Hook Norton and Wigginton, Oxon, April 14, 1914. A plant with darker foliage than Ref. No. 4, narrower pods, and quite distinct habit.—H. J. Rippetspety. “I think this must be referred to #. majuscula Jord., from which it differs chiefly by the narrower leaves. It is probably the var. occidentalis R. & F. = £. occidentalis Jord.” —C. E. Brirron.

Erophila verna Meyer. [Ref. No. 54]. Field track near Rescobie, v.-c. 90, May 2, 1914.—R. & M. CorstrorpHINe. ‘Small plants, which seem to me to be nearer Ff. stenocarpa Jord.”—E. S. MARSHALL.

Erophila majuscula Jord. [Ref. No. 52]. The Lurgies near Montrose, v.-c. 90, April 27, 1914.—R. & M. Corstorpuine. “ £, majuscula Jord.” —J. A. Wuewpon. “Yes.” —C. E. Samon. “Correctly named.”—C. E. Brirron. ‘“ #. stenocarpa Jord., mostly very typical.” - E. 8S. MarsHa.t.

Erophila majuscula Jord. [Ref. No. 52b]. Near Bridge of Dun, v..c. 90, May 14, 1914.—R. & M. CorsrorpHine. ‘“ Yes, I suppose best so labelled, but silicles less rounded above than usual, giving more the shape of those of £. stenocarpa. But the large petals and width of silicles quite exclude that.”—J. A. WHELpDoNn. “Correct, I believe.” —C. E. Satmon. “Correctly named.”—-C. E. Brirron. ‘No, my specimen is good #. stenocarpa Jord.”—-E. 8. MAarsHALL.

Erophila majuscula Jord.’ [Ref. No. 83]. Cultivated ground on Ash Brook, St Ippolyts, Herts, v.-c. 20, April 10, 1914. The most luxuriant examples grow to a considerable size (14 cm), and have large rosettes of broad leaves.—J. E. Lirrte. “I do not recollect seeing anything quite like this. Conf. #. affinis Jord. (Draba leptophylla, var. australis R. & F.). Hairs bifid (rarely trifid or simple) ; flowers large ; silicle oblong ; calyx and petals often suffused with violet-rose.” —J.A.WuHeELpon. “ #. occidentalis Jord.”—C. E. Brirron. “ Foliage curious. Near #. verna; but I am not able to name this.”—E. 8. MARSHALL,

118 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Erophila verna EH. Meyer, d. majuscula (Jord.). Wall top and edge of footpath, the Marine Drive, The Great Orme, v.-c. 49, March 12, 1914.—C. WaTERFALL.

Erophila stenocarpa Jord. Field at St Ippolyts, near 2nd mile- stone for Hitchin, Herts, v.-c. 20, April 24, 1914. Cornfield, about a mile away from Ref. No. 60 (Aeport 1913, p. 450), in similar stony loam. As with Ref. No. 60, there was an admixture of plants with less characteristic silicles.—J. E. Lirrur. ‘“ Right, I think.”—C. E. Satmon. ‘One specimen is certainly right (rather small) ; the others come between that and &#. verna (vulgaris DC.).”—-E. 8. MARSHALL.

Erophila stenocarpa Jord. Sandy cultivated ground, Mauldon, Beds, v.-c. 30, April 25, 1914. The later stage of a plant similar to the preceding, and, like it, mixed with less characteristic forms.— J. E. Lirrtz. “Yes, I think so, but not an extreme example.” J. A. WHELDON. “ Yes.”—E. S. MARSHALL.

Erophila verna EK. Meyer, var. stenocarpa (Jord.). [Ref. No. 6.] From another part of the wall on which No. 4 occurred, between Hook Norton and Wigginton, Oxon, April 14, 1914, Some of this small gathering seems to fit stenocarpa very well, but some of it looked as if it had a touch of No. 4 in it.—H. J. RippEtspeuyi. “ Four of my five specimens are #. stenocarpa Jord.; the other has shorter pods and approaches #. verna.”—E. S. MarsHALt.

Erophila stenocarpa Jord.? [Ref. No. 53]. Field side near Lunanhead, v.-c. 90, May 2, 1914.—R. & M. Corstorpuine. “Silicles 5x2mm. In #. stenocarpa they frequently attain 7 mm. in length, while only 13--1# mm. broad. I would suggest that this is a form of FE. brevpila Jord.”—J. A. Wuexpon. “I think so; a weak small podded state.” E. S. MarsHa tt.

Erophila obovata Jord.? [Ref. No. 55]. Wall top near Clocks- briggs, v.-c. 90, May 2, 1914.—R. & M. Corstorpuine. “I do not know that. Leaves remarkably glabrous at this stage.”—E. S. MARSHALL.

Erophila precox DC. [Ref. No. 3]. Wigginton, Oxon, April 11, 1914. The wall tops of this neighbourhood are covered with Hrophila, a fair proportion of which is /. preecox. These elusive micro-species are all the more difficult to determine, in a great number of individual cases (some of the specimens now sent are only doubtfully precoz), because the colonies are by no means homogeneous ; and there is much obvious transition between species, to say nothing of highly probable crossing. Another difficulty arises from the fact that pods vary in shape even on a single plant, The best and unmistakable precow runs

REPORT FOR 1914. 119

small.—H. J. RIpDELSDELL. ‘‘ Yes, mostly a tall drawn up form.”— EK. S. MarsHatt.

Erophila precoe DC.? Sandhills, Askham, v.-c. 69b, April 12, 1914. This seems to be the same plant as I sent last year.— D. Lump. “Clearly #. precox DC.”--C. E. Brirron. ‘“ Yes, the

usual small coast form.”—-E. 8S. Marsnauy. “ Yes, a new county record for 69b.”—G. C. Drucker.

Erophila precox DC. [Ref No. 58]. Sands of Barry, v.-c. 90, April 26, 1914.—R. & M. CorstorpHine. ‘“ Yes, the normal plant of coast sands.” ——E. 8S. Marswatu. ‘“ Yes, for one specimen at least. <A new county record.”—G. C. Druck.

Erophila spathulaefolia Jord.? (fide J. A. Wheldon). Gravel pit, St Ippolyts, Hitchin, Herts, v.-c. 20, April 4, 1913, and March 17, 1914. I sent this plant to the Watson B.E.C. 1913-14, named by Mr J. A. Wheldon as #. spathulaefolia Jord. I think it is reasonably certain that it belongs to Rouy and Foucaud’s sub-sp. vii. Draba glabrescens Rouy and Fouc. (Hrophila glabrescens Jord.) ; but T have not felt able to carry the limitation further. The specimens now sent are the result of selection three times repeated, ending in the elimination of a very much larger number of plants with more numerous bifid hairs. I have not succeeded in finding any other locality in this neighbourhood for this form with long sparse mostly simple hairs.—J. KE. Lirrne. ‘The examples sent under this name belong to that section of aggregate H. verna distinguished by the hairs being predominantly simple rather than _ branched. These specimens come very close to Jordan’s description of 4. spathulaefolia, but differ in the glabrous scapes, shorter pedicels, and narrower silicules. For these reasons I do not think these plants can be referred to #. spathulaefolia Jord.”—C. E. Brirron. “I do not know that. The leaves are certainly remarkable.”—E. 8. MarsHatt.

Cochlearia groenlandica 1. Coast at Boddin, Forfar, v.-c. 90, June 3, 1914. N.C.R. for Forfar.— R. & M. CorsrorpuHine. “Certainly C. groenlandica.”—K. S. MarsHauu. ‘‘ Yes, a new county record, I believe.”—G. C. Druck.

Sisymbrium Sophia L. Sainfoin field, Thetford, v.-c. 28, June 1, 1914.—F. Roprnson.

Sisymbrium pannonicum Jacq. =S. altissemum L. Waste heap, North of Welwyn Tunnel, Herts, v.-c. 20, June 16, 1913. I send as a record. The waste heap is now cultivated.—J. E. Lirrir. ‘“ Yes, the older name is S. altissumum L., a frequent alien.”—-G. C. Druce,

120 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Sisymbrium orientale L. (=S. Columnae Jacq.). Par Harbour, East Cornwall, June 19, 1914. I send this common alien because the plants are mostly young ones, and show the lower foliage better than I have ever seen before.—C. C. Viaurs. ‘“ Yes.”—G. C. Druce. “The var. subhastatum (Willd.) Thell.”_A. THELLUNG.

Brassica elongata Ehrh. Roadside, Billingshurst, Sussex, July 22, 1914.— A. Wepsster. “The sub-sp. persica (B. & R.) Thell.”—A. THELLUNG.

Brassica Erucastrum Vill. [Ref. No. 40]. Sandhills by sea, Yarmouth, N. Devon, v.-c. 27, May 10, 1914.—F. Ropinson. ‘Is Sisymbrium orientale L.”—A. THELLUNG.

Brassica balearica Loisel.? Railway side, Askham, v.-c. 69b, July 2, 1914.—D. Lume. “ Brassica guncea (L.) Coss.” —A. THELLUNG.

Diplotanis tenurfolia DC. Railway cutting, Thetford, v.-c. 28, June 15, 1914.—-F. Ropinson. ‘This must, I think, be referred to D. muralis, var. Babingtonu (Syme). In tenwifolia the flowers are distinctly stalked at the time of full flowering, and the pods are more distinctly narrowed at both ends. This is the biennial form.”—G. C. DRUCE.

Diplotaaxis ? [Ref. No. 716]. On cotton seed refuse, Hythe Quay, Colchester, v.-c. 19, June 1914.—G. C. Brown. “ Hrucaria myagroides Halac.”—G. C. Drucer.

Bursa pastoris Weber, var. bifida Druce. Hort., Oxon, July 1908. This plant, which approaches macrocarpa in having a few of the silicules with curved sides, has persisted for the last 20 years as a weed in the Botanic Garden, Oxford.—G. C. Druck.

Bursa pastoris Weber, var. bifida Druce. Seed from plants from the Botanic Garden, Oxford (1890), Hort. Druce, 1913. The deep sinus and shape of capsule and leaves remain practically unaltered in culture.—G. C. Drucr. ‘ This is the form of Capsella Bursa-pastoris that F. M. Mott called var. bifida. It is one of the best marked varieties of Shepherd’s Purse.” —C. E. Britton.

Lepidium latifolium L. River Lavant, near Appledram, W. Sussex, v.-c. 13, Sept. 23, 1913.—J. E. Lirrie.

Leprdium Smith Hook., var. alatostyla Towns. Garden specimen from a 2-year-old plant raised from seed collected at Redbridge, near Southampton, Sept. 1901. Hab.—rough hedge banks on the coast. See Leport 1903, p. 10.—Coll. Frepk. Townsenp ; comm, G, C, Drucz,

REPORT FoR 1914. 121

Lepidium neglectum Thell. Waste ground, Askam, v.-c. 69b, August 9, 1914. I name these plants thus with some doubt.—D. Lumps. ‘Yes.”—C. E. Satmon and A. THELLUNG.

Thlaspi alpestre L., var. occitanum (Jord.). Roadside bank, Llanrwst, Carnarvon, v.-c. 49, April 1878.—J. Comper. ‘This is not Thlaspi occitanicum Jord. The specimens are not sufficiently developed to show the characters of the capsules, but judging by the evidence afforded by the habit, foliage, and flowers, this is Thlaspi virens Jord. —C,. E. Brirron. “ Wrongly named as Jordan’s plant (7’. occitanicum). I know it well in the Llanrwst district but am not sure if it differs from type.” —E. 8S. MarsHa tt.

Teesdalia nudicaulis Br., var. minor. Dry heath by Ringmere, Roudham, v.-c. 28, April 26, 1914. This tiny plant grows in the thick moss on Roudham Heath very sparsely, nothing but the tiny head of flowers shows above the moss. It is confined as far as I see to the dry bank of one of the meres which formed part of the old Fen sea.—F:

Rosinson. ‘ Nothing varietal about this. Small states are frequent on poor soil.” —E, 8. Marswatu. ‘ Not a variety, only a condition.” —G. C. Druce.

Hutchinsia petraea Br. Sparingly scattered over several boulders near Lovers’ Leap, Dovedale, Derbyshire, v.-c. 57, April 14, 1914.— G. CuestrER. Also sent from limestone rocks, The Great Orme, Carnarvon, v.-c. 49, March 11, 1914.—C. WatTERFALL.

Reseda lutea L., var. pulchella J. Muell. [Ref. No. 1375]. Worms Heath, Surrey, Sept. 6, 1914. This is a slender more refined form of &. lutea, abundantly branched, with leaf-segments elongated, flat, linear, minutely callous toothed, racemes narrow and flowers smaller than type. My plant agrees well with the original description of this var. by J. Mueller in his monograph of the Resedaceae, and also accords well with the figure in Reichenbach’s J/cones where it is published under the name of R. gracilis Tenore. There is no material quite like my plant in the collections at South Kensington.—C. E. Brirron. “The capsules on my specimens are too young to see if they are papillose ; if smooth the plant may be var. Lecogu J. Muell. A. gracilis of Reichenbach’s Jcones is not identical with &. gracilis Tenore, which was recorded from Wandsworth by A. Irvine in /l. Surrey.”— G. C. Druce.

Reseda lutea L., var. stricta (Persoon, as a species). Wytham, Berks, Sept. 1906. I do not think this deserves more than varietal rank. It still persists at Wytham Mill, Berks.—G. C. Drucz.

Helianthemum Chameecistus x polifoliwum. [Ref. No. 3350} Root from Purn Hill, Bleadon, N. Somerset, v.-c. 6, where it grows mixed

122 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

with both species. Flower garden, West Monkton, May 27, 1914. A very pretty plant.—E. 8. MarsHatt.

Helianthemum canum Baumg., var. vineale (Pers.). On the Sugar Limestone of Cronkley Fell, Teesdale, v.-c. 65, June 9, 1914. Altitude 2000 feet. Too early for flower.—J. Crymr.

Viola montana LL. Wood Walton Fen, Hunts, July 1908. All these were named montana by Mrs Gregory in that year. JI am not quite sure whether she would not now refer them to V. stagnina x canina. V. montana L. itself is not more than a hybrid. With these specimens were others more closely approaching canina and stagnina, and again others which appeared to be ternary hybrids.—G. C. Drucs.

Viola sylvestris Kit. [Ref. No. 25]. Hedge banks, Redhill, Walton, v.-c. 28, April 19, 1914.—F. Ropinson. ‘ Viola sylvestris Lam., emend. Reichb., var. punctata Druce. Note the thick, furrowed spur ; also the central shoot lengthening and flowering.”—E. S%.. GREGORY. )

Viola sylvestris Lam., emend. Reichb. Roudsea Wood, N. Lancs, April 30, 1914. Rare in N. Lancs, where the var. punctata is quite common.—W. H. PEARSALL. “ Yes, typical V. sylvestris, and the most representative gathering I’ve seen for many years.”—KE. 8. GREGORY.

Viola sylvestris Kit., var. punctata Druce. Sturts’ Copse, Oxon, March 1913. A common form of our calcareous woods.—G. C. Druck.

Viola Riwniana Reichb. Hitch Wood, Herts, v.-c. 20, April 13, 1912. Det. E. S. Grecory.—J. E. Livre.

Viola Riviniana Reichb., forma minor. Kirkby Moor, v.-c. 69b, May 16,1914. This was named “floriferous forma minor” by Mrs Gregory in 1913.—D. Lume.

Viola Riviniana Reichb., forma nemorosa Neuman. Hitch Wood, Herts, v.-c. 20, May 13, 1914. Mrs Gregory in lit. (June 21, 1914) writes :—“I congratulate you on having collected the best set of Viola Riviniana, forma nemorosa, that I have ever seen. It is strange how near some of the plants are to V. silvestris (type).”—J. E. Litt Le. |

Viola Riviniana Reichb., var. diversa Greg. On the banks of the Calder, Wakefield, v.-c. 63, May 12, 1914. Mrs Gregory says :— “There is little doubt that they represent my var. diversa of V. Riviniana.”—J. CRYER.

REPORT FOR 1914. 123

Viola canina L. [Ref. No. 37.] Sandy heath land by sea, North Denes, Yarmouth, v.-c. 27, May 9, 1914.—F. Ropinson. ‘“ Yes, the variety pusilla Bab.” —E. S. Gregory.

Viola canina L., var. lanceolata Martin-Donos. ake Winder- mere (shingly stones), N. Lancs, May 16, 1914. This is locally abundant, but I can find it only in such situations, either growing among grass on the stones or invading them on its own account.— W. 4H. Prarsaty. “ Not at all like the luxuriant plants from Wood- walton Fen, Hunts, so named for me (on the spot) by Mrs Gregory. Perhaps the large-flowered var. macrantha Gren. & Godr., from Berrow, N. Somerset, which seems to me the same as the usual plant of the Scottish Highlands.”—E. 8. Marswauu. ‘“ Yes, very near akin to the Norfolk plant described on page 82 of British Violets.” —E. 8. Gregory. ‘ Yes, Mr Pearsall showed it to me im situ, and it approaches closely our Oxon plant.” —G. C. Druce.

Viola canina L. x V. lactea Sm. Open downs near the sea, St Agnes, Scorrier, v.-c. 1; (a) with flowers, May 11 ; (b) with fruit, July 9, 1914. So named by Mrs Gregory from fresh material forwarded by Mr Druce in May. The commonest form of violet on the downs from which specimens were taken, the only others noticed being V. lactea Sm. (in small quantity) and a few plants of V. Riviniana Reichb. — F. Rinstone. “I very much doubt this identification, and would rather name it V. lactea x Riviniana.”—E. S. MaRsHALL.

Viola lacteax Riviniana. |Ref. No. 3535]. Root from Crow- combe, Heathfield, S. Somerset, v.-c. 5; flower garden, West Monkton, May 18, 1914. Like the Tidenham Chase (W. Glos.) plant, this flowers very freely, but never fruits. A good intermediate between the parents, with which it was found.—E. 8. MarsHALt. “Yes.” —E. 8. GREGORY.

Viola hirta L. Open wood on sandy soil, South Pickenham, v.-c. 28, April 23, 1914.—F. Rosinson. “V. hirta var. hirsuta, in the semi-cleistogamous stage. The plants received by me appear to belong to the new form (luteo-canescens) of this variety, lately so named by Dr Moss and myself.” —E. 8. Gregory.

Viola hirta Li. ‘These specimens, with very large and conspicuous flowers, were found growing on the roadside about two miles from Carnforth going towards Silverdale, v.-c. 60, April 11, 1914. In many of the flowers the hook of the spur was scarcely indicated. Mrs Gregory says :—‘“‘ The V. hirta you send reminds me of one which I found last year near Torquay. The shape and size of the flowers suggest a giant race."—J. Cryer. ‘Yes, petals unusually broad and rounded I think.”—E. 8. MarsHauu.

124 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Viola hirta x odorata. [Ref. No. 715]. - Clayey hedgerow, Edward- stone, W. Suffolk, v.-c. 26, April 16, 1914. A few more sheets of this hybrid from a station about three-quarters of a mile from my Ref. No. 81, sent to Club last year. Rather stunted owing to exposure from hedge-cutting.—G. C. Brown.

x Viola multicaulis Jord.=V. hirtax odorata. [Ref. No. 13]. Bladon, Oxon, with both parents, April 1914. Some plants were of a very large size.—G.C. Druce. “ Viola hirta x odorata= x multicaulis.” —H. 8. Gregory.

Viola ? [Ref. No. 333]. Garden weed, Dalton, v.c. 69b, August 18, 1914. These were growing entangled among the arvatica and a pale-flowered cultivated pansy. They may be very luxuriant arvatica, but the large flowers seem to point to another species or to a possible smirch with the garden pansy.—D. Lumps. ‘The broad leaved plants in the set are yellow flowered Lloydiw; the narrow leaved ones approach Provostii Boreau. These narrow leaved plants are possibly hybrids, but there is not any satisfactory evidence for this.” —H. DRABBLE.

Viola Desegliser Jord. [Ref. No. 67]. Near Brechin, v.-c. 90, August 16, 1914.—R. & M. CorsrorpHine. “Yes. Very beautiful examples. The habit as shown in the longer spreading specimens is quite characteristic. In some cases the leaves and stipules are less toothed than usual.”—H. DRABBLE.

Viola Desegliser Jord. [Ref. No. 659]. Field, Layer Marney, N. Essex, v.-c. 19, June 7, 1914. Apparently coming under this, though the leaves are rather broad. The branching habit and thin light green leaves would seem typical. I suppose, if correct, it would be a new county record for v.-c. 19.—G. C. Brown. ‘TI should say V. arvensis Murr., var. rwralis Corb.”—J. Cryer. ‘Some of these—the narrow leaved plants—are certainly Deseglisei; the broad leaved specimens are probably Desegliser also, but approach ruralis somewhat.”— K. DRABBLE.

Viola obtusifolia Jord. (small form). [Ref. No. 660]. Field, Layer Marney, N. Essex, v.-c. 19, June 7, 1914. A new county record for v.-c. 19, if correct-—G. C. Brown. “No, this is ruralis.” —E. DraBBLe.

Viola obtusifolia Jord. [Ref. No. 1198]. Send, Surrey, June 21, 1914.—C. E. Brirron. ‘Yes, obtusifolia Jord.” —E. DRaBBLeE.

Viola obtusifolia Jord. [Ref. No. 661.] Field, Raydon, E. Suffolk, June 1, 1914. A new county record for v.-c. 25, if correct.

REPORT FoR 1914. 125

G. C. Brown. “Yes, obtusifolia, but curiously stout-stemmed, coarse-looking plants.”—-E. DRaABBLE.

Viola arvatica Jord. Garden weed, Dalton, v.-c. 69b, August 13, 1914. These were growing in very stiff, well-manured soil. They were very luxuriant and a tangled mass of stems.—D. Lump. ‘The smaller plants with widely spreading peduncles are arvatica ; and as there seem to be all gradations between these and the larger plants, the latter must be arvatica, too, I suppose. But the large plants are much bigger leaved and less zig-zag than any I have previously passed as arvatica.” —K. DRABBLE.

Viola lutea Huds., with its form or variety amoena (Symons). Nos. 1 and 2 on each sheet were gathered at Malham, v.-c. 64, where they grow together. No. 3 was gathered in Teesdale, v.-c. 65, where it is very plentiful and the prevailing form. . June 1914.—J. Cryer. “Yes, very beautiful specimens. It is interesting to notice the much broader leaves and petals in these plants than in Mr Waterfall’s Cumberland specimens. The large Teesdale plant seems to be Mr K. G. Baker’s sub-var. ansignis.” —E. DRABBLE.

Viola lutea Huds, b. amena (T. F. Forst.). Moorlands, ascent of Catterpallot, near Melmerby, v.-c. 70, Aug. 3, 1914.—C. WarTERFALL. ‘Yes, amena is simply a blue flowered lutea. These are very good specimens, but there is usually an extensive underground development of the branches as in lutea.” —E. DRABBLE.

Polygala vulgaris L., var. Ballia Ostenfeld (Not P. Ballia Nyman nomen). Bettyhill, Sutherland, July 1907. Practically identical with Faroe plants sent me by Dr Ostenfeld. He thought these were P. vulgaris, var. grandiflora Bab.=P. Babingtonw Druce, but they differ materially from the Ben Bulben plant. Nyman, under P. vulgaris aS a synonym (sine descriptione), gave P. Balli, evidently meaning by this name the Irish plant. Therefore, if we use the name it must be as var. Balla Ostenfeld, 7.¢e., not of Nyman. I found it locally on the Limestone at Ardrahan, Galway, and Inchnadamph, Sutherland W.in 1907. Ostenfeld says it is common in the Faroes.—. G. C. Druce. “TI have carefully compared my specimen with examples from Wye Downs, Kent, and also with specimens from the hills around Grassington, Yorkshire, and I can find no characters which separate it from type Polygala vulgaris L.”—J. CRYER. |

Dianthus prolifer L. Shingle, Pagham, W. Sussex, v.-c. 13, June 13, 1914. See Arnold’s Sussex Flora 1907, p. 16.—J. E. Lirrre.

Silene latifolia Rendle & Britten, var. horsuta Gray. [Ref. No. 642]. Cultivated ground, Whatfield, W. Suffolk, v.-c. 26, June 1,

126 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

1914. Apparently identical with the plant distributed by Mr M‘T. Cowan, jun., from Hawthornden, v.-c. 83, in 1911, and named as

above by Mr G. C. Druce.—G. C. Brown.

Silene inflata Sm. Sandscale, Dalton, v.-c. 69b, July 7, 1914. The plants produced very poor capsules and no seeds. The petals were markedly cream-coloured until they were reaching maturity.—D. Luma. “A remarkable form; I have nothing like it, excepting a plant which I gathered last July on bushy shingle near Seaton, South Devon.”—E. 8. Marsnaty. ‘ Conf. S. vesicaria Schrad., var. pubescens DC., sub. var. parvifolia Rouy.”—J. A. WHELDON.

Silene conica L. Roadside, dry sandy soil, Hilborough, v.-c. 28, June 11, 1914.—F. Ropinson. Also from sandy land, Cockley Clay, 3 miles 8.W. of Swaffham, W. Norfolk, v.-c. 28, June 23, 1914.—J. E. LITTLE.

Silene anglica L., b. quinquevulnera L. Hay field, Cromer, v.-c 27, June 13, 1914.—F. Rosinson. “Good S. quinquevulnera L. This seems to me much nearer to S. gallica L. than to S. anglica L., of which I cannot reckon it as a variety.”—H. 8. Marswauy. “ Yes, I had no previous record for the county.”——G. C. Druce.

Silene Otites Wibel. Dry heath land, Barnham Common, W Suffolk, June 1, 1914.—F. Rosinson.

Silene nutans L., var. dubta (Herbich) Williams Mon. Silene in Journ. Linn. Soc., vol. xxxii., p. 171 (1896). Shingle, Lydd, Kent, in great quantity, July 1904. This appears to have been first described by Schur as S. transsylvanica in Oester. Bot. Zeit. viii. (1858), pp. 22 et 287. Herbich’s dubia was published in his Flora Bucowina, p. 388, (1859). In the Kew J/ndex both names are merged into S. nutans, but the publication of the latter wrongly cited as ex Rohrbach’s Mono- graph of 1868, and the date as usual is suppressed. Dr Williams in his valuable Monograph (I.c.) put dubia as a variety of S. nutans, and in the same year Rouy and Foucaud (7. Fr. i11., p. 144) cites S. dubia and S. transsylvanica as synonyms of their variety swbverticillaris, the description of which does not seem to happily fit our Kentish plant, which Mr C. E. Salmon in 1905 first clearly showed was distinct from S. nutans. The longer petioled and narrow, lanceolate-acute stem leaves, which are not so strongly viscid as in S. nutans, and the narrower and more cylindric calyx, are marks which he rightly emphasises. If kept as a species, it should stand as S. transsylvanica Schur ; if a sub-species, the authority is Nyman Consp. ; if a variety, as in my British Plant List, then as S. nutans L., var. transsylvanica, comb. nov. <A red flowered form was still earlier described as a species by Vestin Flora (1821), p. 50, as S. rwbens.—G. C. Druce. ‘“ Yes, this

REPORT FoR 1914. Loy

is the more graceful, less hairy, flavescent petalled plant I recorded as S. dubia Herb. in Journ. Bot. 1905, p. 127, where it is mentioned my brother and I saw it in this station (Dungeness) in 1888.”—C. E. SALMON.

Cucubalus baccifer L. Wood, Merton, v.-c. 28, August 6, 1914.— IF. Ropinson. ‘“ Yes, a most interesting plant of which we know no existing station in Britain.”—-G. C. Druce.

Cerastewum nigrescens Edmonston (=C. arcticum Lange). | Ref. No. 2355]. Ben Nevis, August 1903.—G. C. Drucz.

Cerastium vulgatum L., var. pentandrum Syme. | Sands of Barry, v.-c. 90, April 26, 1914.—R. & M. CorstorpHine. “I believe that this is var. pentandrum Syme (under C. triviale Link), though the sepals are as strongly hyaline-bordered as in C. semidecandrum L.”— KH. 8S. MarsHatt.

Cerastium semidecandrum L. Sandhills, Askham, v.-c. 69b, March 30, 1914. Is this the typical plant?—D.Lums. “ Yes, a small state.” —KE. 8S. Marswaty. ‘Correctly named.”—C. E.Saumon. ‘“ Yes, and a new county record for 69b.”—-G. C. Druce. |

Cerastium semidecandrum L. St Ouen’s, Jersey, April 1907. Cf. var. congestum Gren.—G. C. Drucr. “This var. is not mentioned by Rouy and Foucaud. The plant seems to come under var. glandu- losum Koch.”—E. 8. MARSHALL.

Cerastium tetrandrum Curt. Sandhills, Askham, v.-c. 69b, March 30, 1914. Ironworks, sandhills, and golf links at Askham ; limestone quarry at Staunton. Many plants are to be found flowering during the first week in March. Most of the flowers seem abnormally large through their being five-parted. The lower leaves are markedly spathulate and deeply tinged with reddish purple. Mr Druce agrees with me that it is most likely fetrandrum, and adds the remark that in all probability much of what is named pentandrum is this plant.— D. Lums. <“ Doubtless correct, but gathered too young and depauper- ate.”—E. 8. Marswaty. “ Right.”—C. E. Satmon.

Cerastuum ? (Ref. No. 32]. Hedgebanks, Rocklands, v.-c. 28, May 4, 1914.—F. Ropinson. “This seems to be a robust or shade- grown form of C. arvense L. It agrees with the description of the var. latifoliwm Fenzl in Ledeb. Fl. Ross. i., p. 412 (1842), which is as follows :—‘ Foliis caulinis majoribus, praesertim superioribus e basi late ovata oblongis v. lanceolatis; ramorum ac fasciculorum anguste lanceolatis v. linearibus ; omnibus utrinque pubescentibus, cauliculis palmaribus spithamaeis et altioribus, petalorum lobis late ovatis.’

128 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

There are specimens like this in the British Museum from one or two English localities, and also from the Continent.”—A. B. Jackson. “This must be an arvense form, and it has the uppermost stem-leaves broad-based, one of the characters, according to Rouy and Foucaud (Fl. Fr.) of var. latifoliwm Fenzl, but I have no authentic examples to compare. I have never seen this beautiful luxuriant form in Surrey.”—C. E. Sautmon. ‘Ripe fruit is not available in these examples, but C. arvense L., var. latifolium Fenzl (C. grandiflorum Gilib.) is like this, a tall form with broad leaves and large flowers, but I have seen no example.”—J. A. WHELDoN. “This isa rather notable form of C. arvense Linn., and appears to agree very well with the description of C. arvense L., var. latefoliwm Fenzl, in Rouy and Foucaud Ll. de France iii., p. 203. The description given of this var. is as follows:—-“‘ Feuilles caulinaires, surtout les supérieures a base large, ovales-oblongues ou sub-lancéolées celles des fascicules et des rameaux étroitement lancéolées, toutes pubescentes ou poilues sur les deux pages; tiges assez élevées; petales a lobes ovales.”—C. E. Britton. ‘An extraordinary plant, which I think comes under C. arvense L. It comes nearest, of the vars. given in Rouy and Foucaud, to their « Jatifolium Fenzl, but the stems, pedicels, and calyces are densely glandular.”——E. 8. MarsHatt.

Stellaria neglecta Weihe. Hedgebank by thicket, near Great Western Station, Malvern Wells, Worcester, v.-c. 37, May 11, 1914. —C. WarTrErRFALL. “Yes, the variation with stalked glands on the inflorescence, which I have called forma glandulosa.” —E. 8. MARSHALL. ““S. media, var. neglecta Weihe, the plant with hairy pedicels and acutely tubercled seeds.”—G. C. Druce.

Arenaria gothica Fr. Origin, Moughton Fell, v.-c. 64, altitude 1600 feet. A new station, where I counted fifty plants. Cultivated in my garden, Shipley, July 1914.—J. Crver.

Arenaria tenurfolia L. Walls of Abbey ruins, Castleacre, v.-c. 28, May 28, 1914.—F. Roprinson. ‘“ Yes.”—-E. S. MarsHALt.

Arenaria tenurfolia L., var. laxa (Jord.)? Coarse ballast, Great Northern Railway, Grove Mill, Hitchin, Herts, v.-c. 20, July 1914.— In habit these plants agree with the set from Welbury. I could find no glandular plants among them.—J. E. Lirrnz. “ Yes, a strong form.” —H. 8. Marswauu. “My plants are almost glabrous, and do not agree with my Lakenhead Jaxa.”—G. C. DRucE.

Arenaria tenuifolia L., var. lawa (Jord.) (Det. C. E. Salmon). Hitchin, Hexton Road, near turning to Welbury, Herts, v.-c. 20, July 31, 1914.—J. E. Lirrtz. “Glands very few on my two plants.” —E. 8. MaArsHALL.

REPORT FoR 1914. | 129

Sagina nodosa (L.) Fenzl, var. glandulosa Bess. [Ref. No. 76]. Damp part of over year hay field, Tottington, v.-c. 28, July 23, 1914. —F. Ropinson. ‘“S. nodosa, var. viscidula Coss. & Germ.”—J. A. Wuetpon. ‘ Apparently correct ; Rouy and Foucaud make it a sub- variety, perhaps rightly. Corbiere seems to be the authority, under Sagina.”—H. 8. Marsuautu. Also [ Ref. No. 77] from shore of Lake, Westmere, Tottington, v.-c. 28, July 24, 1914.—F. Ropinson. “A different and much more leafy form.”—H. 8S. MarsHAtt.

Sagina nodosa Fenzl, var. glandulosa Bess. [Ref. No. 115]. Avebury Down, N. Wilts, v.-c. 7, August 28, 1914. Has this been tested by cultivation? I have distinctly glandular forms from Guern- sey and Dog’s Bay, Galway, and plants from Glencar, Sligo, which I thought to be quite glabrous, show one or two glandular hairs under a strong glass. It seems probable that the glandular hairs are developed only on sandy soil or in exposed situations. Similarly var. monizformis Lange, to which these plants might be referred, appears to be a state of poor soil—W. C. Barton. “I believe so.”—H. 8. MarsHatt. : “Yes, the Avebury Down plant and Mr Robinson’s No. 76 would doubtless develop into the so-called var. montliformis.”—G. C. DRucE.

Sagina ciliata Fr. Sandy cart ruts, Shouldham, W. Norfolk, v.-c. 28, June 24, 1914.—J. E. Lirrnte. “The Sagina is rather puzzling, and S. Aewtert must always nowadays be reckoned with! However, I think you are right in calling your plant S. ciliata. I see the awned sepals present, which I believe are never found in S. Reuwteri. The capsule, when over ripe, does not seem to open ultimately in the form of a cross, so S. apetala is ruled out.”—-C. E. SaLMon in lit. ‘Exactly S. ciliata Fr., as described by Babington in the Manual, which has the outer sepals more acuminate and re- curved, and the plant is nearly glabrous. It is according to S. Reuteri Lojac, but not of Boissier. This typical S. ciliata is very rare, if found at all, in Lancashire, and I believe the restricted plant has a south and easterly range. Dr Moss refers nearly all the plants we call S. Rewteri Boiss. to S. ciliata, and I believe favours the reduction of S. ciliata to the status of a variety under S. apetala. Whatever view is taken, I feel sure ciliata and Keuteri represent two frequently recurring extremes usually readily separable, and I think both are distinct from S. apetala.”—J. A. WuHELpoNn. “TI believe so.”——E. 8. MARSHALL.

Sagina ciliata Fr., forma. [Ref. No. 52]. Cliffs near Arbroath, v.-c. 90, August 15, 1914. Outer sepals have a very short mucro, but al] the sepals are obtuse and incurved at the tip like Reuterz; also they are much shorter than the capsule. The valves of the capsule are truncate at the tip.—R. & M. Corstorpuine. “A ditticult plant. Very like S, Keuterc in habit, but I see that the outer sepals are mostly

130 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

mucronate, which is a character of S. ciliata. It seems to be therefore a small glandular var. of the latter.”—E. 8. MarsHatu. “TI cannot separate this from S. Heutera Boiss. The mucronate outer sepals do not recurve, and are very different in outline from the narrow acuminate ones of typical czlzata, as shown in Mr Little’s specimens referred to above.”—J. A. WHELDON. “This interesting ciliata form will come, I think, under var. minor Rouy and Fouc. (f. Fr. iii., p. 289, 1896). The whole plant is more or less glandular, but the leaves are scarcely strongly enough ciliate to agree well with Corbiére’s description of var. filicaulis Jord.”—C. E. Satmon. “ Nearest to S. apetala, var. ciliata Garcke (=S. ciliata Fries). Benekin (Bot. Zert. iii., p. 721, 1845) maintained that the restricted S. apetala and S. ciliata were mere habitat states. His views were combated by Babington (Bot. Gaz. i., pp. 174-177, 1849), and supported by Henfrey (Bot. Gaz. i1., p. 182, 1850). So far as I can judge, both S. apetala, var. ciliata, and S. apetala, var. reutert H. & J. Groves, have glandular and eglandular forms.”—C. E. Moss.

Sagina apetala Ard., b. prostrata Gibs. St Ippolyts, Hitchin, Herts, v.-c. 20, May 29, 1913. Det. 8S. H. Bickham.—J. E. Lirrte. “Yes.” —E. 8. Marswatut. “Mr Little’s Herts specimens are apetala, but are very lax and large for prostrata (see Phyt. 1., p. 178).”—G. C. DRUCE.

Sagina apetala Ard., var. prostrata Gibs. With the type, on the mud path of a newly made road near the sea, Penarth, v.-c. 41, July 7, 1913. I suppose this is correct, but it may be S. Heuterz Boiss., a plant which I do not know. The relative length of sepal and capsule varies (? entirely according to age) from about 3—4 to 1—2.—H. J. RIDDELSDELL. ‘Is not this S. Reuterz Boiss.? Flowers small ; sepals appressed in fruit; pedicels short, or shortish.”—E. 8. MARSHALL. “Why not S. ciliata Fries, var. ambigua Corbiere. Most of the peduncles are glabrous. The sepals are not spreading as in apetala.”— G. C. Druce.

Sagina apetala Ard., var. barbata Fenzl. Sand dunes, Ainsdale, S. Lancs, v.-c. 59, July 20, 1914.—J. A. Wueupon. ‘Correctly named, I believe.”—-C. E. Satmon. ‘Yes, what we regard as type, I think.” —E. 8. MarsHauyt. “ Yes, I look upon this as the type with var. b. glaberrima Koch, =imberbis Fenzl, as the rarer form.”—G. C. Drvuce.

Sagina ? Cliffs at Boddin, near Arbroath, v.-c. 90, June 9, 1914. This plant does not agree with any of the described forms of S. maritima or S. apetala. It grows on limestone, associated with S. maritima (type) and Cochlearia grenlandica; but it is distinguished at a glance from the former by its glaucous-grey colour,

REPORT FoR 1914. 13t

—R. & M. CorstorpHine. The Rev. E. 8S. Marshall, to whom two batches of fresh plants were sent, writes :—‘ The Sagina strikes me as being of special interest. It clearly belongs to S. maritima Don. It seems nearest to var. densa in habit, but much less crowded ; from that it also differs by the capsules exceeding the sepals. Besides this, it has some of the stems and pedicels furnished with gland-tipped hairs, which I never saw before in this species. Like var. debilis (Jord.), it is quite prostrate ; but that is a slender spreading plant, with long internodes. Also var. prostrata 'Townsend MS. (never described, I fancy), is a plant two or three times as large and clearly different . . . The better examples of the greyish-glandular plant, in more advanced condition, still quite puzzle me. The leaves resemble maritima in outline ; with, however, a small mucro or apiculus at the top, as a rule. The sepals are as in maritima ; broader than in apetala. S. maritima does not appear to be ever grey or glaucous, or at all hairy or glandular. So it seems to be either a new species (at least for Britain), or a new and very marked variety of marityuma.”—E. 8S. MarsHatt, in lit. “ Apparently identical with the plant sent as var. prostrata Towns. (Travis and Wheldon, Report 1913, p. 459), since identified as S. maritima, var. ciliata Nordst. We have seen an authentic specimen of Townsend’s plant, which differs in being more glabrous and larger in all its parts. It has also a different habit. In comparing R. & M. Cor- storphine’s plant with that from South Lancashire, it must be noted that the latter grew near docks where coal is constantly loaded. They have therefore an unnaturally dark appearance.”—J. A. WHELDON. “This is very interesting. Clearly, I think, a marituma form, which I have never seen before. There is a var. ciliata Nordst. in Hartm. Skand. Fl. 1879, p. 247, and a var. glauca Strobl. in Oest. Bot. Zeit. xxxv., 1885, p. 209, but unfortunately I have no examples of either.” —C. E. Satmon. “This is undoubtedly S. marituma Don. I have not my specimens available at the moment, but, speaking from memory, I think the Arbroath plant is very like the S. marituma from Garston, distributed by Mr Wheldon and me last year, except that the former is more glandular. Our Garston plant has been referred by Dr O. Nordstedt to his var. ciliata, and I have no doubt that the Arbroath plant also comes under the same variety, which is probably a northern form.”—W. G. Travis. “An interesting plant which Mr and Mrs Corstorphine showed me 2n situ last June. The large capsules and fruiting calyx suggest S. maritima ; but the habit, the glandular hairs, and the apiculate leaf point to S. apetala. Unless a hybrid, the specimens point to the desirability of uniting S. apetala and S. mari- tuma, two plants which in any case are closely allied. It is, in my opinion, the case that the Jordanian species of Sagina are unduly small; on that standard one might easily make a score or two of British species of Atriplex and Salicornia. However, of the segregates or close allies of S. apetala, S. marituma is the best; but I would reduce S, ciliata and S, reutert to varieties of S. apetala, I may add

132 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

that the name S. maritima (G. Don in Herb. Brit. fase. vii., No. 155, 1806, cum descr.) is antedated by that of S. erecta (Miller in 77. Dan. fasc. 15, p. 2, t. 845, 1782), non L., S. erecta L. being Manchia erecta), but S. erecta Miller, being stillborn (since at that time S. erecta L. was valid), S. marituma Don remains the correct name for the species.” —C. E. Moss. “This is certainly not specifically distinct from S. maritima Don, though it does not exactly agree with any described variety. It approaches var. densa (Jord.), but is certainly not that form. The greyish colour ascribed to it, is probably owing to the reflection of light from the glandular-pubescent surface. The glan- dular hairs themselves are so minute that they do not seem to furnish a very tangible character, but taken in conjunction with the habit of the plant, the relative lengths of calyx and capsules, there are sufficient grounds to regard this plant as a well-marked var. of S. maritima. The apiculate leaves seem to be a varying character in this species.” —C. E. Brirron. “They are most interesting specimens. The text-books usually describe S. marituma as glabrous, but Rouy and Foucaud say the sepals are rarely glanduliform. These are clothed with more or less glandular hairs on the leaves, stems, and peduncles. Examination of about 200 specimens from various sources shows that specimens from Afton Bay, Isle of Wight (C. E. Palmer), have a few short glandular hairs practically confined to the peduncles; others from Headon Hill and Alum Bay, Isle of Wight (C. E. Palmer), closely approach the Scottish plant in habit, and in the hairs, which are, however, less plentiful. Specimens extremely like the Scottish plant, gathered by me at Penmon in Anglesey, were sent to the Club, — but no report was made on them; a more diffuse form from Stone- haven, Kincardine, is also hairy. Specimens of var. debilis which I gathered at Maghera, Co. Wicklow, in 1909, have a few long ciliate hairs, especially on the leaf-sheaths. Other hairy specimens are from Mullion, Cornwall. All my other gatherings are glabrous. This Scottish plant appears to be an analogous condition to the var. glandulosa of Sagina nodosa. Mr and Mrs Corstorphine may well describe and name it.”—-G. C. Druce.

Sagina procumbens L., var. apetala Fenzl. Walton, 8. Lanes, v.-e. 59, September 10, 1914. Some flowers contain a rudimentary petal, or even two, but they are mostly absent.—J. A. WHELDoNn. “ Are such variations more than forms?”—E. 8. MarsHatu.

Claytonia perfoliata L. Cultivated land, Walton, v.-c. 28, May 18, 1914.—F. Rosinson.

Montia fontana L. = M. lamprosperma Chamisso. [| Ref. No. 2358]. Growing on the shingle of a garden path, Glen Brittle, Skye, June 1910, showing that lamprosperma has both the land and water form,— G. C. Druce,

REPORT FoR 1914. 133

Malva pusilla Sm. Bank near Corn Mill, Ventongimps, v.-c. 1, August 11, 1914.—F. Riustone.

Tilia platyphyllos Scop. Park, Barton Seagrave, Northants, v.-c. 32, July 31 and September 5, 1914. Introduced.—G. CuHEstTER. “No, this is 7%lia petiolaris, which is frequent in cultivation, but does not seem to have been found in a wild state. It is considered to be a sport of Zulia argentea, the White Lime of South-Eastern Europe and Asia Minor.”—A, B. Jackson.

Tilia ulmifolia Scop. Rockingham Woods, Northants, v.-c. 32, July 30, 1914. Rather frequent in this and other outlying woods, and probably indigenous.—G. Custer. ‘This is the small-leaved lime Tilia cordata Miller. The latter name has been rejected on the ground that specimen assumed to be Miller’s type, in the British Museum, is 7’. platyphyllos, but as pointed out by Mr A. Henry (Trees of Great Britain vii., p. 1656, 1913), there is no doubt that Miller’s description of 7’. cordata in the Dictionary refers to the small- leaved lime and not to 7. platyphyllos, and his name therefore takes preference over Scopoli’s ulmifolia.”—A. B. JACKSON.

Geranium phaeum L. Open wood, Watton, v.-c. 28, May 17, 1914. —F. Rosinson.

Geranium pyrenarccum Burm. Dry hedge bank, Croxton, v.-c. 28, June 1, 1914.—F. Ropinson.

Geranium rotundifolium L. Dry hedge bank, Thetford, v.-c. 28, June 1, 1914.—F. Rozsinson. “A rare Norfolk plant.”—-G. C. DrucE.

Geranium Robertianum L., var. purpureum Vill.? Shingle, Pag- ham, W. Sussex, v.-c. 13, June 13, 1914. “This Geranium is what we always used to call G. purpwreum, but what it is called now I cannot say. It is a coast-shingle form, and is not, I believe, found inland.” OC. E. Salmon, im let., August 16, 1914.—J. E. Livre. “Too hairy for the plant of Foster and Villars, but still of the type undoubtedly. It is, however, what is often named purpureum. The carpels closely resemble those of Foster’s plant. It may be the var. rubricaule Horn. in Willk. et Lange’s Prod. Fl. Hisp. iii., p. 320, but

I have seen no specimens of this.”—-A. Bennett. “TI gathered this there in 1901. Mr Arthur Bennett wrote :—‘ What we so call; but Britten and Nicholson years ago denied the name.’”—E. 8. MarsHALu.

*«‘ Yes, the glabrous-carpelled plant under aggregate purpureum Vill.” —G. C. Druce.

Geranium Robertianum L., var. |Ref. No. 117]. Bordeaux shingle, Guernsey, August 2, 1914.—W.C. Barron, ‘“ Very different

134 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

from the Pagham plant, which has narrow leaflets and sub-glabrous calyces. This is very crowded and compact; leaflets broad, thin ; calyces and pedicels with many long, slender, gland-tipped white hairs. I cannot name it.”-—E.S. Marsnaty. ‘This is aggregate purpureum

Vill.”—G. C. Druce.

Erodium cicutarvum L’Herit., var. pumpinellifolium Cav. In great quantity in a cornfield, Wigginton Heath, Oxon, July 29, 1914. Petals, 3 longer and paler; 2 shorter, darker, and spotted. Flowers vary in size. The later flowers do not show spots (? in every case). The spots consist of small very pale areas, which are, except for a narrow rim, filled with close-set very dark crimson splashes and dots, which lie in lines radiating from the very base of the petals, where the veins of the petals begin to diverge. I have never seen the spots described before, and did not know what to expect. The petals are unequal in about the proportion 2:3. The flowers are usually con- siderably larger than in the common plant, which abounds in such places as sand-dunes and waste ground. The var. has been found in Oxford before.—H. J. Rippetspetn. ‘Just what I understand by that.”—-E. 8. Marsuatu. “This has the facies of Sibthorp’s piumpr- nellifolium, but the petals should be spotted ; an evanescent character, for I have seen spotted and unspotted flowers on the same plant. Kirscher’s Flora von Stuttgart has a lengthy disquisition on the biology of this interesting form, which Dillenius was the first to distinguish.” —G. C. Druce.

Impatiens Noli-tangere L. Woods about Stock Gill Force, Amble- side, v.-c. 69, July 27, 1914.—C. WaTERFALL.

Rhamnus catharticus L. On carboniferous limestone, Silverdale, v.-c. 60, altitude 30 feet, May 29, 1912. These specimens were gathered from a shrub eight to nine feet high, growing by the side of the road leading to Silverdale, and almost opposite the end of the Carn- forth road. The bush has since been cut down to widen the road. The yellow-green colour and mealy character of the foliage were very striking when first gathered.—J. CrYEr.

Acer campestre L., var. leiocarpon Wallr. Ashmansworth, N. Hants, v.-c. 12, September 18, 1914. All these specimens have been seen by Mr A. B. Jackson who assents to the naming.—W. C. Barron.

Medicago Falcata L. Among gorse on dry heath, Barnham Common, v.-c. 28, August 17, 1914.—F. Rogpinson. ‘“‘ Yes.”——E. 8. MarsHa tt. ‘Nice specimens from, I presume, a native station which is not mentioned in Nicholson’s new Flora of Norfolk.”—C. HE. Saumon.

Medicago sylvestris Fr. Roadside, gravelly soil, Bawburgh, v.-c, 27, July 3, 1914.—F. Rosrnson,

REPORT FOR 1914. 135

Medicago sylvestris Fr., var. procumbens Fr. =M. cyclocarpa Hy. _[Ref. No. 1352]. Between Mickleham and West Humble, Surrey, August 23, 1914. Growing on the border of a field cropped with lucerne. I have not been able to see any material quite like my plant in the collections at the Natural History Museum, South Kensington. My plant agrees with Fries’ description of his variety, and also with the plant called by Rouy WM. sylvestris Fries, var. cyclocarpa Hy. As will be seen, the distinguishing features are the long diffuse stems, narrow leaflets, the dusky yellowish-purple corollas, and the ring-like legumes.—C. E. Brirron. “I think this a I/. falcata x sativa, nearer to satva in flowers. Young pods with many appressed silky hairs.” — KE. 8S. MarsHatt.

Medicago minima Desr. Dry hillside, chalk soil, Hillborough, v.-c. 28, June 11, 1914.—F. Rosrnson.

Medicago lupulina L., var. Walldenowiana Koch? Roadside, Guildford, Surrey, v.-c. 17, September 1914.—J. ComBer. ‘‘ Nodoubt the hairs on the pods are glandular, but one can hardly call them ‘yellowish.’”—-A. BENNETT. ‘Yes, fruit glandular. The habit is that of cultivated MW. lupulina, in my specimens.”—E. 8S. MarsHatu. “Pods with glandular hairs, 2.¢e., var. Willdenowiana Koch.”—C,. E. SALMON.

Medicago lupulina L., var. errocarpa Rouy. Formby, 8S. Lancs, v.-c. 59, July 15, 1914.—W.G. Travis. ‘“ Agrees with the description, but Rouy makes it a sub-variety.,.—E. 8. Marsuauu. “Strictly speaking, it is sub-var. eritocarpa Rouy. ‘ Légume pubescent ou velu ; plante ordinairement fortement pubescente-soyeuse,’ and this plant only approaches these characters.”—G. C. Druck.

Trifolium scabrum L. Dry hillside, chalk soil, Hillborough, v.-c. 28, June 11, 1914.—F. Rosinson.

Trifolium subterraneum L. Heath land, near water, by Punch Bowl, Croxton, v.-c. 28, May 3, 1914.—F. Rosinson. Also from Lancaut, v.-c. 34, June 12, 1913. A rare plant in W. Gloster ; this is a new locality for it.—H. J. RIpDELspDELL. Also from Colney Heath, Herts, v.-c. 20, May 19, 1913.—J. E. Lirtte.

Trifolium minus Relh., var. microphyllum Ser. Sandhills, High. town, 8. Lancs, v.-c. 69, July 7, 1914.—W. G. Travis.

Trifolium dubium Sibth., var. pygmaewm Soy.-Will. Foot of cliffs, Arbroath, August 15, 1914.—R. & M. CorstorpHine. ‘ Accord- ing to Rouy, this variety was described under the name 7’. filiforme, and is the same as 7’, minus Relhan, var. microphyllum Seringe, in

136 THE BOTANICAL EXOHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

DC. Prodromus. The Arbroath cliff plant I can only look upon as starved type.”—E. S. Marsnatu. ‘“ Yes, the correct name for the species is 7’. dubvum Sibth. Fl. Ox. 1794.”—G. C. Drucs.

Securigera Securidaca (L.). Garden weed, Dalton, v.-c. 69b, August 9, 1914. If attempts be made to grow this from the seeds supplied, the testa should be pierced before sowing, otherwise most of | them will remain like a piece of flint, no matter how wet the soil may be. It is a most interesting plant to watch. The earliest umbels, in this quarter at anyrate, are microscopic in almost every particular. Mr Druce kindly named the plant for me. The faded unpressed pieces are included to show the length of the mature umbel stalks. — D. Lums. “Yes, the Bonaveria Securidaca (L.) Desv. The genus Bonaveria Scopoli dates from 1777; that of Secwrigera DC. only from 1805.”—G. C. Druce. ‘“ Yes.”—A. THELLUNG.

Lotus siliquosus L. (Tetragonolobus siliquosus Roth). Chalk Downs, near Streatley, Berks, May 1914. First found 1911, well established.—Coll. V. C. Murray ; comm. G. C. Druce.

Lotus uliginosus Schk., var. glabriusculus Bab. Wet lane, Petit Bot, Guernsey, August 1, 1914. Very similar to a plant distributed last year through the Watson Exchange Club by Mr Standen, and so named by Mr Salmon. Is it var. glaber of Bréb., and the same as var. a. sub-glaber of Syme E.B.—‘“sub-glabrous with the leaflets ciliated at the margins?” These specimens grew in the damp hedgerow of a ‘“‘water lane” and were very different in general appearance from the hairy form growing near by on dryer ground —W. C. Barron. “ Doubtless right. But I think that the amount of hair varies accord- ing as the locality is wet or dry.”"—-E S. Marsnatu. “ May pass, I think, but not so extreme as specimens sent me by Mr R. 8. Standen from Lindfield, Sussex, in 1911. Rouy (/. Fr.) segregates L. wligi- nosus into L. glabriusculus Bab. and f. villosus Lamotte. Our commoner plant is certainly the latter. Rouy remarks that the flowers of glabriuscula do not become green (or only slightly so) when dry, whereas those of villosus usually show this change. This is borne out in my herbarium specimens and in Mr Barton’s example before me.”—C. E. Satmon. “ Yes, but Bab. in ed. 2 of his Manual, put it as a variety of LZ. major, hence if his name for it is used ‘ Bab.’ should be in brackets. Brébisson in his #7. Norm. 87 (1858), under L. uliginosus had a var. glaber (as in my List).”—G,. C. Drucs.

Lotus tenwis Waldst and Kit. Rough pasture, clay washing on chalk, under ‘“ Eagle’s Nest,” Offley Hill, Hitchin, Herts, v.-c. 20, August 10,1914. JZ. tenuis in N. Herts occurs (1) on heavy boulder clay ; (2) on the chalk scarp, in poor soil with a washing of marl or of clay from the caps on the hills, It generally occurs with L. cornicu-

REPORT FoR 1914. 137

latus, and these appear to be intermediate forms. At Pagham, W. Sussex, v.-c. 13, it occurs on the sea bank in apparently drier situations, though perhaps moisture soaks up from below.—J. E. Lirriy. ‘‘ Very characteristic.” — EK. 8. MARSHALL.

Astragalus glycyphyllos L. Hedgebank, Holme Hall, v.-c. 28, August 26, 1914.—F. Rosrnson.

Astragalus danicus Retz. Newmarket Heath, Cambridge, v.-c. 29, June 8, 1913.—W. C. Barron. Also sent from dry heath, near Icklingham, W. Suffolk, June 4, 1914.—F. Ropinson.

Oxytroprs sericea (liam.) Simonk. Bettyhill, Sutherland, July 1907. Growing very plentifully in blown sand on the coast of West Sutherland at Bettyhill. It was in splendid flower, and was a conspicuous object in the flora of the district. The name wralensis must, however, give way to that of O. sericea Simonkai, the trivial of which is earlier than wralensis.—G. C. Druce.

Vicia lutea L. Beacon Hill, St Osyth, N. Essex, v.-c. 19, July 5, 1914.—G. C. Brown. Also sent from field near Lower Sydenham, W. Kent, June 1912. Introduced. -—Coll. H. B. Foxtrer ; comm. J. Groves.

Vicia Lathyroides L. Maulden, Beds, v.-c. 30, April 25, 1914. Many of the roots have come up uninjured from the light sand and show nodules, which I suppose to be Rhizobia containing bacteria and assisting the plant to obtain a supply of nitrogen.—J. E. Lirre.

Lathyrus palustris L. Marsh land, edge of ditch, Woodbastwick, v.-c. 27, July 9, 1914.—F. Rosrnson.

fubus plicatus Wh. & N., forma. Bognor Common, Fittleworth, W. Sussex, v.-c. 13, July 1914.—L. Cummine. “ A very singular and constant little form. Though strongly recalling A. fissws in prickles and stem pieces, it goes better under A. plicatus, even its prickles and stem leaves suiting plicatus better. Small and slender as the prickles are, they are really too few in number, too strong, and often too stout based for jfissus ; while the basal leaflets of the stem leaves are not always strictly sessile and so hardly differing at all from those of plicatus in July.” —W. M. Roaers.

Rubus affinis Wh. & N., var. Lriggsianus Rogers. Near St David’s, Pembroke, August 20, 1903. See Report 1903, p. 14.—Coll. Avueustin Ley; comm. G. C. DRucE.

Rubus imbricatus Hort. Glen Frome, near Stapleton, Gloucester- shire, August 20, 1913.—J. W. Wuite.

138 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Rubus sciaphilus Lange. Grwyne Valley, Brecon, August 13, 1903. See Report 1903, p. 15.—Coll. Augustin LEy ; comm. G. C. DRvUcE.

Rubus thyrsoideus Wimm. Wyre Forest, Shropshire, September 15, 1903. See Report 1903, p. 15.—Coll. Aucustin Ley ; comm. G.C. Drucr. “Not &. thyrsoideus Wimm., I feel sure; but a good form of the variable &. argentatus P. J. Muell.”—W. M. Roaesrs.

Rubus robustus P. J. Muell, forma. Badby Wood, Northants, v.-c. 32, July 1913 and 1914.—L. Cummine. ‘I see no reason for separating this from £&. robustus, though the long lax pyramidal panicles are somewhat abnormal. It seems best to let the name cover a series

of forms, as it does now with us—off type towards my swbhinermis.”— W. M. Rocers.

Rubus silvaticus Wh. & N. Badby Wood, Northants, v.-c. 32, July 1913.—L. Cummine. “ As far as I know, a record for Northants.” —W. M. Rocers.

Rubus lentiginosus Lees. Fittleworth, W. Sussex, v.-c. 13, July 1914.—L. Cummine.

Rubus macrophyllus Wh. & N., forma. Badby Wood, Northants, v.-c. 32, July 1914.—L. Cummine. “A hairy form towards Schlech- tendalw.”—W. M. Rogers.

Rubus adenanthus Boul. et Gill. Below Peckforton Castle, Cheshire, August 5, 1903. See Report 1903, p. 17. Ex herb. A. H. Wo.tey-Dop ; comm.G.C. Druce. ‘ Apparently.,.—W. M. Rocers.

Rubus anglosaxonicus Gel., var. vestitiformis Rogers. Woods at Ross, Herefordshire, September 5, 1903.—Coll. Aueustin Ley ; comm. G. C. Druce.

Rubus Drejerr G. Jensen. Durdham Down, Bristol, W. Glos., August 1, 1914.—J. W. Wuirr. ‘I agree.”—W. M. Rogers.

Rubus Babingtonii Bell Salter. Common round Fittleworth, W. Sussex, v.-c. 13, July 14, 1914.—L. Cummine.

Rubus fuscus Wh. & N. Bognor Common, and elsewhere near Fittleworth, W. Sussex, July 1914.—L. Cummine.

Rubus fuscus Wh. & N., var. macrostachys P. J. Muell. Cold- borough, Herefordshire, September 8, 1903.—Coll. Aueustin Ley ; comm. G. C. DRucE.

REPORT FoR 1914. 139

Rubus scaber Wh. & N.? Badby Wood, Northants, v.-c. 32, July 1914.—L. Cummine. ‘Apparently &. scaber, but, if so, with glandu- lar development on stem abnormally weak. J. scaber would be a record for Northants.”—W. M. Roasrs.

Rubus glareosus Rogers, nov. sp. Bognor common and other stations in W. Sussex, v.-c. 13, July 1914.—L. Cummine.

Rubus Marshalli Focke & Rogers. Common near Fittleworth, W. Sussex, v.-c. 13, July 1914.—L. Cummine.

Rubus Kaltenbachii Metsch. Newent wood, W. Gloucester, September 10, 1903.—Coll. Aucustin Ley ; comm. G. C. Drucz.

Rubus hirtus Waldst. & Kit., var. flaccidifolius a and b. Badby Wood, Northants, v.-c. 32, July 1914.—L. Cummine. ‘There seems no reason for keeping forms a and 6 apart ; though 6 sheets seem on the whole further away from flaccidifolius towards rotundifolius. But I have to own (with these packets before me). it may be open to question whether these two varieties can profitably be kept apart. Both varieties are records for Northants.”-—-W. M. Roaerrs.

Rubus nutkanus Mogino. Woods near Colliston, v.-c. 90, May 28, 1914. See B.#.C. Report 1913, p. 316.—R. & M. CorstorpHine.

Rubus ? Naturalised in several stretches of wood near Leys- mill, Forfar, v.-c. 90, July 3, 1914.—R. & M. CorstorpHine. ‘“ This reminds me of &. spectabilis Pursh, naturalised near Sandling Park, S. Kent, and locally called (fide Dr Cosmo Melvill) ‘the woodman’s rose. I have gathered it, but cannot find my specimen.”—E. S. MARSHALL.

Potentilla thuringiaca Bernh., var. Nestleriana Schinz and Keller. Railway bank near Friockheim, Forfar, v.-c. 90, July 3, 1914. See B.E.C. Report 1910, p. 500.—R. &. M. CorstorpHine.

Potentilla verné L. Limestone crags near Wynd’s Point, Hereford, v.-c. 36, May 11, 1914.—Coll. R. F. Townprow; comm. C. Warer- FALL. Also sent from Carboniferous Limestone, Silverdale, v.-c. 60, altitude 30 feet, May 30, 1914. Occurs in several stations in and around Silverdale. This year it was seen to great advantage in a rough and rocky pasture leading towards Silverdale Moss.—J. CRYER.

Potentilla procumbens x erecta =P. suberecta Zimm. Peat moor near Ashcott Station, N. Somerset, August 6, 1914.—J. W. Wuuirts. “Yes, a slender heath-form of the hybrid, which I have seen near Shapwick station, not far away.”—E. 8S. Marswatt.

140 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Alchemilla acutidens Bus., var. alpestriformis C. E. S. Origin near Lochan-na-Chat, Ben Lawers, 1913. Hort. Reigate, Surrey, Aug. 1914. See Journ. Bot. 1914, p. 287. It was noticeable how - much smaller these plants kept compared with A. alpestris grown alongside in the garden.—C. E. Saumon.

Rosa sempervirens L., b. Melvini (Towndrow). Edge of pond, Leigh Linton, Worcester, v.-c. 37, May 7, 1914.—Coll. R. F. TowNnpDROow; comm. C. WATERFALL. “So very much off Ff. sempervirens, as I have seen it in N. France, that I incline to think it specifically distinct. Not known elsewhere, I believe.”—-E. 8. MARSHALL. |

Rosa canina L., agg. [Ref. No. 4951.] Hanwell, Oxon, Aug. 1910.—G. C. Drucr. Comes between (1) andegavensis Bast. and (p) verticillacantha Mérat ; that is, some leaflets have most or all of the teeth simple, whilst others have them more or less compound. According to Keller and Christ, &. hirtella Rip. is a somewhat similar form, but with oval fruit and sepals glandular on back.”-—W. Barcuay.

Rosa dumetorum Thuill., var. platyphylla Rau. [Ref. No. 3.] Hedge, Grey Abbey, Co. Down, Sept. 3, 1914. Leaves irregular in size; some very large, very dark green above. Approaching biserrate towards top of leaf. Fruit single; some very large and turbinate—C. H. Wappevt. “This is a form of AR. dumetorum Thuill. The (g) platyphylla Rau., so far as I can make out, differs from (d) wrbica chiefly by having leaflets broader in proportion to their length. The present specimen does not show this difference. It had best be set down as a glaucous form of (d) urbica, with globose instead of ovoid fruit.” —-W. Barcuay. ‘“T do not think this can be &. platyphylla Rau., which, according to descriptions, is a plant with much broader leaflets—orbicular or very broadly oval—and fruit tending to a more ovoid ferm. I should call this R. sphaerocarpa Pug.”—C. E. Brirron.

Rosa glauca Vill. [Ref. No. 1]. Grey Abbey, Co. Down, Septem- ber 3, 1914.—C. H. Wappety. “Not materially different from No. 2. Serration rather more compound. Both are glaucous forms, and might therefore, according to Baker, come under var. glawcophylla Winch.” —W. Barctay. ‘Fruit subglobose ; sepals deciduous, patent or loosely reflexed ; leaflets slightly compound-serrate. It can hardly be any form of F. glauca. Is it not a ‘canina’ (aggregate), of the S. sphaerica Gren., or &. globularis Franchet affinity ?—E. 8. MarsHatt.

Rosa glauca Vill. [Ref. No. 2]. Grey Abbey, Co. Down, Septem- ber 3, 1914.—C. H. Wappett. “This is not a form of FR. glauca but R. canina L. (g) dumalis Bechst.”—W. Barcuay.

° REPORT FoR 1914. ‘141

Rosa Eglanterva L. Peppard, Oxon, July 1906.—G. C. Druce. “*More advanced fruit necessary to say whether 2. comosa Rip.”— A. H. Wouiey-Dop.

Rosa suberecta Woods, var. Westridge Wood and Nibley Knoll, W. Gloucester, July 10 and September 29, 1904.—J. W. Wurrz. “This is doubtless a variation of the omissa group of FR. tomentosa Sm. It is certainly not a variety of A. suberecta Woods. Nor do I see how it can come under &. suberecta Ley, as it differs in all the characters relying on which that so-called species has been segregated. It has not prickles straight or nearly so, but stout and decidedly falcate. Its calyx tube is not densely aciculate, the fruit is not globose. The petioles have not ‘numerous unequal faicate acicles and pricklets,’ but are mostly quite unarmed. Nored colour is perceptible in the younger parts, and not more than is common to many species in the older branch. It might as easily be made a variety of R. Sherardi Ley and more easily a var. of Rk. Andrezovi Ley.” —W. Barciay. “ Flowering examples only, showing very little of the armature. I consider this to be &. tomentosa Sm., and cannot see any likeness to Ley’s own examples of his species—A. suberecta Ley=f. villosa L., var. sub- erecta Woods.” —C. E. Brirton.

Rosa tomentosa Sm. [Ref. No. 1368.] Marden Park, Surrey, Sept. 6, 1914.—C. E. Brirron. ‘Belongs, I think, to the scabriuscula group of A. tomentosa Sm., differing from var. scabriuscula Sm. in its more hairy and somewhat glaucous leaflets, its prickles less slender and more hispid styles. The serration of the leaves is also less deep and less compound.”— W. Barctay.

Rosa pimpinellifolia lL. x tomentosa Sm. [Ref. No. 69 (1).] Elliot Den, near Arbroath, v.-c. 90, July 27 and September 13, 1914. Growing with both parents. The tomentosa forms near it belong to the groups swbglobosa Sm. and omissa Déségl. Serratures nearly simple, fruit broadly ovate or almost globular, with a short neck.— R. & M. CorstrorpHine. “No. 69 (1) has a look of a mollis x spimosissima, to my eye.” —H. 8. MARSHALL.

Rosa wnvoluta Sm., var. [Ref. No. 66 (3).] Cuthlie Den, near Arbroath, v.-c. 90, July 27 and September 13, 1914. Bush —tall, straggling; petals—large, pink; fruit—long, urceolate, with longish neck ; leaflets—almost uniserrate, shghtly hairy above, more so beneath, with a few glands on the midrib.—R. & M. CorsTorPHINE. ‘An interesting hybrid. The second parent can be better guessed at on the spot.” —E. S. Marsuatyi. ‘“ These two forms are practically the same, except that in the second the fruit is elliptic-oblong, or in some cases turbinate, whereas in the former it is, as is more usually the case, globose. Both have the serration

142 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BR#ITISH ISLES.

simple, except that here and there a toothlet may be detected. Both have the leaves sparingly hairy and quite eglandular, except that on the midrib an occasional gland may be detected. The main sepals in both have some slender pinnae, and in both the pedicels and fruits are pretty thickly clothed with glands and acicles. Both have glaucous (blue-green) leaves, and their prickles are similar in form. In the second the fruit as I saw it on 29th July, before it had begun to shrivel, was remarkable for its lengthened shape, ovoid prolonged or in some cases obovoid, quite different from any other form which I have seen. The mature fruit is not so striking. At some distance, but in the same locality, was another clump, somewhat similar to the first, but with more double teeth and with leaflets broadly elliptical, rounded at both ends and occasionally almost orbicular. The leaves were strongly tinged with red even at that early part of the season. Still a fourth bush or clump differed in its leaves with composite glandular serration and with numerous subfoliar glands. All four, however, appear to me to be variations of R. pimprnellifolia x tomentosa Sm. Mr and Mrs Corstorphine are to be congratulated on the discovery of these interesting forms.”—-W. Barctay.

Rosa imvoluta Sm., forma=R. spinosissuma L. x tomentosa Sm. August 18, 1914. This is the rose described by Major Wolley-Dod in List of British Roses, p. 9, under the name of &. spinosissima (agg.) x dumetorum (agg.) or (coriifolia’ agg.) f. Margerisoni f. nov. The specimens enclosed are from a plant in my garden, sent me about 7 years ago by Mr Margerison, who discovered it in Knipe Wood, Kettlewell, N. Yorks. JI formerly sent a moderate supply to the Watson Club, and what I now send should enable all who take an interest in roses to obtain a specimen. To the note published in the 28th Annual Report of the Watson Club I have nothing to add except _ that I am more convinced than ever that this rose belongs, not to the hibernica, but to the «nvoluta group.—W. Barcuay. ‘I presume that this is identical with the rose described by Wolley-Dod under the cumbersome form of &. spinosissuma (agg.) x dumetorum (agg.) (or coriifolia?t agg.) f. Margerisoni, in his List of British Roses. How much more satisfactory would it have been had Wolley-Dod simply described this as x Rosa Margerisoni! These excellent specimens afford a better opportunity of studying this rose than the late-gathered specimens contributed by Mr Druce in 1911. That this is a spinosissema hybrid is, I believe, uncontroverted ; the only point on which opinion is divided is as to the second parent. As to A. tomentosa or FR. omissa entering into the composition of this rose, I am quite unable to believe. The presence of a tomentosa form would be revealed by a glandular development, whereas this rose is practically eglandular. The very narrow stipules are against the view of A. coriifolia being the second parent, and I think Wolley-Dod’s first alternative A. spinosissema x dumetorum is the correct solution. The examples have a certain

REPORT FoR 1914. 143

resemblance to &. hibernica, but clearly cannot be ranged under that name, and, scientifically, it is impossible to call this A. onvoluta Sm., as Mr Barclay does, the points of divergence being so great.”—C. E. Brirron. ‘Nearer to the spinosissima parent than these hybrids usually are. At first glance it suggested to me A. mollis, var. coerulea, as the other parent.”-—E. 8. MARSHALL.

Rosa involuta, var. Wilsont Borrer. Growing on a very restricted area on a bank at the edge of the Menai Strait, near Bangor, N. Carnarvon, v.-c. £9, September 7, 1888.—C. Baitzy.

Pyrus torminalis Ehrh. ‘Long Cross,” near St Newlyn East, W. Cornwall, June 1, 1914, and August 7, 1912 and 1914. Fairly good specimens, I think.—C. C. Vieurs.

Crategus monogyna Jacq., forma subtrilobata Druce. | Ref. No. '5e) Virley, N. Essex, v.-c. 19, May 31, 1914. - Teste G. C. Druce, who says wi lit. “A very interesting form—forma subtrilobata.”—G. C. Brown.

Crateegus oxyacanthoides Thuill., var. macrocarpa Heger. | Ref. No. 70.| Virley, N. Essex, v.-c. 19, May 31, 1914; fruit, September 6, 1914. Teste GC. Druce. Mr Druce says in lit. “The leaves are not quite typical oxyacanthoides. The size of the fruit brings it under var. macrocarpa Heger, which I have seen in Essex, both North and South.”—G. C. Brown.

Crategus oxyacanthoides Thuill. (oxyacantha L.). Hedgerow in lane near Melmerby, Cumberland, v.-c. 70, August 3, 1914.—C. WateRFALL. “Under this, but not quite typical. Several forms have only one style and the fruit is small, but the leaf-veining is correct. I believe it is a new county record for v.-c. 70.”—G. C. Druce.

Crategus oxyacantha L., var. Single tree at Wigginton, Oxon, October 19, 1914. I doubt this identification ; for though there are two styles, and the fruit is apparently smooth, yet the veins of the leaves are frequently not incurved. The remarkable feature of the tree is the flattened fruit, which is of about the same diameter as the usual Crategus fruit, but very little more than half the length. The haws packed separately shew the feature. The tree was noticed too late for good specimens to be procurable. It is hoped that next year better and completer specimens may be distributed, and some name

may be found for the variety.—H. J. RippeEuspeuu. ‘“ Material shabby ; style solitary ; so it appears to be a striking leaf-variety of C. monogyna Jacq.”—-E. 8. Marsnauy. “An interesting looking

plant, but the specimen is without flowers, and the fruit is imperfect.

144 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

I should like to see more and better specimens, but I expect it is forma triloba, unless it be a hybrid with oxyacanthoides.” —G. C. DRUCE.

Crategus punctata Jacq. Planted ground, Dalton-in-Furness, v.-c. 69b, June 15, 1914.—D. Lump. “In the absence of fruit it is not possible to name this definitely. In any case, being a cultivated tree, it is of no interest to the members.”—A. B. Jackson. ‘“ Yes, similar to the plants so named by Dr Thellung.”—G. C. Drucz.

Saxifraga avzoides LL. Mountain streamlet above Easedale Tarn, Westmoreland, v.-c. 69, July 19, 1914.—C. WartTERFALL.

Saxifraga hypnoides L., agg. [Ref. No. 2902.] Ben Bulben, Sligo, June 1909.—G. C. Drucr. “ Yes, and under the type, I should say.” —EH. 8S. MarsHALL.

Saxifraga stellaris L. Swamps on descent of Red Screes towards Scandale Beck, near Ambleside, Westmoreland, v.-c. 69, July 29, 1914.—C. WaTERFALL.

Saxifraga hirsuta L., var. acutidens HK. 8. Marshall. [Ref. No. 3647.| Roots from cliffs above Lough Doon, Connor Hill, 8. Kerry, June 1911; flower garden, West Monkton, May 24, 1914. The Linnean type has crenate leaf-toothing ; in var. acutidens it is serrate. This is the usual Irish form, and varying considerably in the shape of the lamina, and in the amount of hairiness. The leaf-bases are trun- cate or somewhat cuneate; I believe that a cordate base indicates crossing with S. Gewm.—-E. 8. MARSHALL.

Chrysosplenium alternifolium L. Wet places, Via Gelia, Derby- shire, v.-c. 57, April 12, 1914. Intermixed with oppositifoliwm.— G. C. CHESTER.

Tillaea muscosa L. Sandy cart ruts, Shouldham, W. Norfolk, v.-c. 28, June 24, 1913.—J. E. Lirrwe.

Sedium Forsterianum Sm., type (Watson’s a. virescens). [Ref. No. 4034.] Root from Culbone Woods, 8S. Somerset, v.-c. 5. After several years’ cultivation its green foliage is maintained ; and itis less robust than the var. giaucescens, from the coast near Minehead; garden, West Monkton, June 24, 1914.—E. S. MarsHatt.

Callitriche obtusangula Le Gall. Pools on Upper Chase Road, Malvern, Worcester, v.-c. 37, May 13, 1914.—C. WarrrratL, “I am unable to pass an opinion on such specimens.”—A. BENNETT. ‘“‘ Neither habit nor fruit suggest this, to me; the latter is flat, not obtusely angled. I think it a form of C. stagnalis Scop., but more

REPORT FOR 1914. 145

careful drying would give one a better chance to judge.”—HE. S, MarsHauu. ‘ Probably C. stagnalis.”—G. C. Druce.

Epilobium roseum Schreb. [Ref. No. 658.] | By a small spring in a clayey bank, Halstead, N. Essex, v.-c. 19, August 23, 1914.—G. C. Brown. “No; certainly a state of #. obsturum.”—H. 8. MarsHAtu.

Epilobium alsinefolvum Vill. Mountain streamlet, the Red Screes, over Kirkstone Pass, Westmoreland, v.-c. 69, July 29, 1914.—C. WATERFALL. ‘Yes.”—KEH. 8. MARSHALL.

Circaea alpina L., b. intermedia Ehrh. Roadside, on way to Jenkin’s Crag, Ambleside, Westmoreland, v.-c. 69, July 22, 1914.— C. WatTeRFALL. “I cannot separate this from the type. C. «nter- media Ehrh. is a much larger plant.” —E. 8S. MARSHALL.

Astrantia major L., var. involucrata Koch. Tayside, Mid Perth, July 1905. Quite naturalised on the banks of the Tay below Perth, where very luxuriant plants are to be seen. The variety is described in the Synopsis Fl. Germ., p. 280, 1837, as “involucri foliola umbella sesquilongiora, ad apicem rarius uno-alterove denticulo, nec vero in omnibus foliolis, neque in singulis regulariter, instructa.”—G. C. Druce.

Cicuta virosa L. Banks of river, Salhouse, v.-c. 27, July 9, 1914. —F., Rosinson.

Pimpinella Saafraga L., var. dissecta Druce. Avebury Down, N. Wilts, v.-c. 7, August 5, 1913.—W. C. Barron. ‘Towards this, but character not very good, in my one small plant.” —E. 8. MarsHatt.

Anthriscus ere Bernh. Seedlings. Sandy bank, near Ketter- ing, v.-c. 32, March 22, 1914.—G. CuHEstER.

Selinum Carvifolia L. Chippenham Fen, Cambridge, August 1903. Of somewhat uncertain occurrence. That year it was in great profusion, but in other years but few plants were seen. Unless intentionally sown there, it has the appearance of being native.— G. C. Druce.

Galium Mollugo L., var. Bakeri Syme. Cliff tops, Milford-on-Sea, S. Hants, August 1914.—J. ComBer. “To me a reduced form of Mollugo.- The leaves are unlike the var. Baker.” A. BENNETT. “Under that, I think ; but some of the leaves broaden out unusually upwards.”—E. 8S. Marswatu. ‘Surely not Bakeri which should have more or less linear-lanceolate leaves, etc. Is not this a reduced state of ordinary Mollugo (elatum), frequently found on sea cliffs?” —C. E, SALMON.

146 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Valerianella dentata Poll. Clears, Reigate, Surrey, June 30, 1914. This, at first sight, was taken for the variety miata, but on closer examination the fruits appeared diseased. Mr Ramsbottom kindly examined the specimens and reported that the whole plant was affected by Erysiphe Polygont DC., a “mildew” that attacks a very large number of species of plants.—C. HE. Satmon.

Valerianella rumosa Bast. Wheat field, Cromer, v.-c. 27, June 21, 1914.—F. Rosrnson. ‘I should name this V. dentata Poll., not JV. rimosa.” —C. E. Satmon. ‘“ V. dentata.”—G. C. Drucs.

Filago minuma Fr. Sand dunes, Ainsdale, 8. Lanes, v.-c. 59, July 25, 1914.—J. A. WHeLpon. Also from sandy roadside, Fresh- field, S. Lancs, v.-c. 59, July 19)4.--W. G. Travis. ‘“ We have been wrong in giving Fries as the authority for this name. Persoon Syn. ii., p. 422, 1807, is the earlier publication, Fries’ minima not appearing till 1822. Mr Travis’s specimens approach the var. swpina Rouy and Camus Fl. Fr. viii., p. 176. Mr Wheldon’s are nearer the var. brevi- folia of those authors.”—-G. C. Druck.

Gnaphaliwm luteo-album L. Sandy land formerly cultivated, Thompson, v.-c. 28, July 23, 1914.—F. Ropinson. “ Nice specimens. The label describes them as occurring on ‘land formerly cultivated.’ Nicholson (#7. Norf. 1914, p. 97) calls this species ‘ doubtfully native’ in the county, but I think that the coast stations (where the plant occurs on apparently virgin soil) need not be regarded with much suspicion.” —C. E. Saumon.

Gnaphalium sylvaticum L. Rough pasture between Shilling Green and Little Hill End, Herts, v.-c. 20, September 9, 1913.—J. E. Lirrur.

Chrysanthemum ? [Ref. No. 628]. On cotton-seed refuse, Hythe Quay, Colchester, v.-c. 19, June 1914. Near segetwm, but flower somewhat deeper yellow and leaves bright green. Plants all small. —G. C. Brown. “Chrysanthemum coronarvum L.”—A. THELLUNG.

Artemisia campestris L. Among gorse on dry heath, Barnham Common, y.-c. 28, August 17, 1914.—-F. Roxinson. “ Beautifully prepared specimens. On the Continent this is a variable species, 20 varieties being described in the Flore de France.”—G. C. Drucz.

Senecio viscosus L. Railway track, Sandsend, Yorks, v.-c. 62, August 13, 1913.—J. E. Lirrie. “ Yes. I have found it near Ware.” —G. C. DRUCE.

Senecio vulgaris L., forma. [Ref. No. 121]. Stiff clay on dyke, Brean Down, N. Somerset, v.-c. 6, April 26, 1914.—W., C. Barron, |

REPORT FoR 1914. 147

Senecio lautus Forst. Banks of Tweed, Selkirk, v.-c. 79, Septem- ber 1914. Native of Australia. Growing in this neighbourhood it does not increase by its own fruits, but by rooting all along its old wood. On a plant of two years’ growth I counted 70 old stems, and the branches shooting from them each bearing on an average 190 blossoms.—I. M. Haywarp.

Cirsium lanceolatum Scop. x acaule Weber. Undercliff, Milford-on- Sea, 8. Hants, v.-c. 11, August 1914. TI send a few more sheets of this plant to supplement those sent last year. A further examination im situ convinces me that whatever it may prove to be, it is certainly not the typical caulescent state of C. acaule. The phyllaries have patent or sub-patent spinous tips, whereas those of C. acaule are mucronate only. The leaf segments are longer, narrower in proportion to their length, and more parallel sided ; and the petioles, especially of the lower leaves, more spinous-ciliate. The whole facies of the plant is different—greyer in colour, and considerably rougher and coarser looking. It also flowers at least a week or ten days earlier.— J. Comper. “See Report 1913, p. 476. I can add nothing to my remarks, except to say that one is better qualified to judge after seeing the plant growing with its supposed parents. Dr Thellung says: scarcely x lanceolatum.”—G. C. DRucE.

Cnicus oleraceus L. Marshy meadow at Limehaugh, E. Perth, August 11, 1914. This thistle appeared first in 1911 in a marshy meadow close by the River Tay, which in very high floods is lable to be inundated. Jt has appeared every summer since to the number of 60 or 70 flowering heads. As the meadow is cut about the end of August, it is doubtful if the plant produces ripe seed so as to give it the chance of becoming thoroughly naturalised. Although not a native of Britain it is common in Central Europe and in Scandinavia.

—W. Barciay. ‘Being found in’ South Scandinavia, Denmark, Holland, Belgium, France, and Germany, it should occur as a native in Britain.”—E. S. Marswaun. “Yes, Cirsium oleracewm Scop.

Also naturalised near Selkirk (Hayward).”—G. C. Druce.

Centaurea Jacea L., var. pratensis Koch. Ditcham Park, Hants, August 25,1914. <A rather short small-flowered plant easily dis- tinguished from the C’. decupens and C’. nigra forms growing with it. Heads sometimes rayed.—R. 8. Apamson. Referred by Dr Thellung to C. nigra L. (pappus distinctus), sub.-sp. ewnigra Gugler. Folia insuete angusta.

' Centaurea nigra L., var. ough pasture on clay, Ditcham Park, Hants, August 25, 1914. <A very distinct small-headed form which seems near C’, Debeauxv Gren. & Godr.—R. 8. Apamson. ‘“ According to the somewhat artificial key of H. Saintange Savourié, this seems to

148 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

come under C. consimilis x nemoralis, though one of the parents may be C. Debeauaivi, which occurs in S. England. My examples do not show fruit, which is useful in dealing with these Centaurea forms, but they agree with C. consimilis in the longly-ciliate, somewhat lax araneuse phyllaries, and with C. nemoralis in the deeper-coloured appendages and strongly inflated stem apex.”’—J. A. WHELDON. ‘“‘Mr Adamson remarks :—‘ A very distinct small-headed form, which seems like C. Debeauaw G. & G.’ I do not think this will do for C. Debeauau G. & G., but I think it must be a nigra (including obscura Jord. and nemoralis Jord.) form, rather than coming under pratensis Thuill., in which group Rouy (f7. Fr.) places C. Debeauxi as a ‘forme’ of C. microptilon Gren.” —C. E. Saumon. “C. nigra L. cf. sub.-sp. nemoralis (Jord.) Gugler, acced. ad sub -sp. Debeauaw (G.G.) Gugler.” A. THELLUNG.

Centaurea melitensis L. Par, E. Cornwall, v.-c. 2, July 10, 1914. This plant was in good quantity at Par this year. Many plants were small, but there were three fine ones hike good Centawrea nigra.— C. C. Vieurs. ‘“ Yes.” A. THELLUNG.

Centaurea ? [Ref. No. 627.] On cotton-seed refuse with many other aliens, Hythe Quay, Colchester, N. Essex, v.-c. 19, June 16, 1914. Near C. Calcitrapa L., but flower bright yellow; no supplementary spines at base of large involucral spines; leaves with broader segments.—G. C. Brown. ‘“ An early state of C. Calcitrapa L., is it not ?”—E. S. Marswatu. “This is C. Calcitrapa L.”-—R. 8S. Apamson. ‘“Thisis C’.. pallescens Del., var. typica Gugler and Thellung, forma /yalolepis Gugler. See Thellung Adv. Fl. Montpellier p. 546, 1912.”—A. THELLUNG.

Centaurea aspera L. Hayfield, Tottington, v.-c. 28, July 23, 1914. —F. Rosinson. “Yes, var. genuina Willk.”—R. 8. ApAmson. “Recte.” —-A, THELLUNG.

Carthamus tinctorius L. On rubbish by the canal, Litherland, S. Lanes, v.-c. 59, September 5, 1914.—J. A. WHELDON and W. G. Travis. ‘ Yes.”—-A. THELLUNG.

Picris Hieracoides L., var. gracilis (Jord.). Letcombe Castle, Berks, August 1901. This variety is described by Rouy (7. fr., x., p- 23) as “plus gréle, pauciflore, a pubescence plus ténue, bien moins hispide ; feuilles pubescentes, a peine rudes, plus brievement denteées, calathides + contractées & la maturité.” These characters we might assume to be caused by the habitat—dry chalk downs—on which it grew.—G. C. DRUCcE.

Crepis biennis L. Edge of cultivated land, Walton, v.-c. 28, June 9, 1914.—F. Ropinson. ‘“ Yes; not given for 28 in Yop. Bot, This

REPORT FOR 1914. 149

plant seems to come under the var. Bannatica Rochel. Leaves un- equally runcinate-pinnapartite or laciniate.”—-G. C. Drucez.

Crepis taraxacifolia Thuill. [Ref. No. 46]. Cultivated land, light soil, Hargham, v.-c. 28, May 24, 1914.--F. Ropinson.

Hveracitum Auricula L. [Ref. No. 2832]. Originally from a pasture near Keevil, 8S. Wilts, v.-c. 8. Remote from houses, but only one patch seen. Cultivated at West Monkton, May 27, 1914. Styles yellow.—E. 8. MarsHatu. ‘“ Correct.”—E. F. Linron.

Hieracium cyathis Ley. |Ref. No. 3975]. Cheddar Gorge, N. Somerset, v.-c. 6, May 30, 1914. Styles yellow. Leaves firm, rather glaucous, often blotched. Rev. Augustin Ley pointed out this to me several years ago as being his plant.—E. S. Marswauy. ‘ Exactly matches specimens in my herbarium gathered by the late Rev. A. Ley in the same Gorge on May 29, 1902.”—_J. Cryer. ‘This agrees with my plants from Cheddar, which were named /. cyathis for me by Rev. A. Ley.” -—E. F. Linon.

1 Meracium britannicum F. J. Hanb. Limestone crags, the Red Screes, over Kirkstone Pass, Westmoreland, v.-c. 69, July 29, 1914.— C. WaTERFALL. ‘No, young plants of H. anglicum Fr.” —J. Cryer. ‘There is much resemblance to H. britannicum in these specimens, but the leaves of that species are rather strongly ciliate and toothed near the base, and the ligules are glabrous above. This plant is no doubt a variety of H. anglicum Fr., and probably var. longibracteatum F. J. Hanbury, but the specimens are undersized, having only one head each.” —E. F. Linton.

Hieraciwm britannicum F. J. Hanb. Ling Gill, Ribblehead, alt. 1000 feet, v.-c. 64, July 25, 1914.—J. Cryer. ‘I cannot find any- thing better to put this to than H. britannicum, of which it may be a dry rock form. I have some exactly like it.,—-E. F. Linron. “I think so.”— E. 8S. MarsHALt.

Hieracium sylvaticum Fr. [Ref. No. 66]. Shady bank, West Runton, v.-c. 27, June 21, 1914.—F. Ropinson. “No. 988, Z.C., ed. x., is H. silvaticum Gouan. In my opinion, this is not /. silvaticum Gouan, but H. diaphanoides Lindeb.”—J. Cryer. “ H. sciaphilum Uechtr., var. transiens Ley.” —E. F. Linton. |

Hieracium pellucidum Laestad. Hackfall Woods, near Tanfield, v.-c. 64, June 7, 1913. This is a frequent hawkweed on _ the Carboniferous Limestone of Yorkshire, being found at Ingleton, Ribble- head, Ling Gill, Hesledon Glen, Arncliffe, Kettlewell, Malham, Gordale, Grassington. The above is a new station for it in the North

150 THE ROTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Riding.—J. Cryer. ‘ Rightly named.”—E. F. Linton. Also sent from Wyre Forest, Worcester, September 15, 1903. See-Report 1903, p. 22.—Coll. Aueustin Ley; comm. G. C. Druce.

Hieracium lucidulum Ley. Catterick Glen, W.. Yorks, June 25, 1903.—Coll. Aucustin Ley; comm. G. C. Druce. “ H. lucidulum Ley = H. pellucidum Laest.”.—E. F. Linton.

Hreractum varicolor Dahlst., stylose form. [Ref. No. 3309]. Originally from limestone, Allt nan Uamh, near Inchnadamph, W. Sutherland, v.-c. 108, July 1908. Flower garden, West Monkton, June 16, 1914. The original plants were so determined by the Rev. EK. F. Linton. It comes true from seed. Styles greenish-yellow ; heads epilose.—E. 8. MarsHa.t.

Hieracium serratifrons Almq., var. caliginosum Dahlst. [Ref. No. 3986]. Raised from seed collected by Mr W. A. Shoolbred near Inch- nadamph, W. Sutherland, v.-c. 108, in 1908. Flower garden, West Monkton, June 8, 1914. Styles yellow; ligule-tips glabrous ; heads very glandular, epilose ; leaves dull, deepish green, white-dotted and glabrous above, very hairy beneath. Closely resembles plants so named from near Tongue and Kylesku, W. Sutherland.—E. S. MarsHaLut. “I agree; the same form as we have so named for Mr Marshall from other places in Sutherlandshire.”—E. F. Liyron.

Miveracvum sagittatum Lindeb., var. subhirtum F. J. Hanb. Winch Bridge, altitude 900 feet, v.-c. 65, June 6, 1914. Teste Rev. E. F. Linton. A new county record, I believe.—J. Cryer. “Yes; heads larger than in the normal Scottish form.’—E. 8. MarsHatt. Also sent from High Force, Teesdale, altitude 1000 feet, v.-c. 65, June 6, 1914. Teste Rev. E. F. Linton.—-J. Cryer.

Hieracwum ? On the Carboniferous Limestone, Haweswater, Silverdale, v.-c. 60, May 30,1914. The late Rev. A. Ley named similar specimens for me //. cymbifolium Purchas. The Rev. E. F. Linton

writes on these specimens :—‘‘I believe this is dwarf 1. eapallidiforme Dahlst., from limestone. It is worth cultivation to test proposed name.”—J. CRyER. ‘Smaller than any specimen that I have of H.

sanguinewm Ley ; but I think that it belongs here.” ——E. =. MarsHatu.

Hieracium diaphanoides Lindeb. Festiniog, Merioneth, July 14, 1903. See Report 1903, p. 22.—Coll. Aueustin Ley; comm. G. C. Druce. ‘ Of the three specimens on my sheet two are HH. vulgatum Fr.; the third is probably a seedling of H. diaphanoides.”—J. CRYER.

Mreracvum rigidum Hartm., var. fries Hartm. Blaenau-Festi- niog, Merioneth, July 14, 1903. See Report 1903, p. 23.—Coll. Aveustin Ley ; comm, G, C, DRrucs.

REPORT FoR 1914. 151

Meracium rigidum Hartm., var.? Litton-dale, v.-c. 64, August 18, 1914. Mr Linton says :—‘“ Var. scabrescens Dahlst. At least much the same as the Dent-dale specimens I so named for Prof. D. Oliver, and which W. R. Linton accepts as that variety.” —J. CRYER.

Hreracium boreale Fr. |Ref. No. 113]. Colwyn Bay, Denbigh, v.-c. 50, September 1, 1913.—W. C. Barron. ‘“Right.”—E. F. Linton. ‘Under the type, I believe; stem less hairy than usual.” —E. S. MARSHALL.

Hreracvcum boreale Fr., var. virgultorum Jord. Wyre Forest, Worcester, September 15, 1903. See Report 1903, p. 23.—Coll. AvgGustTIN Ley ; comm. G. C. Druce.

Mieracium umbellatum L., var. pauciflorum Hartm. [Ref. No. 49]. N. of Grand Havre, Guernsey, August 10, 1912. On specimens of this gathering submitted to him Mr Marshall reported :—“ Practi- cally identical with my specimen from Inveroran, Argyll (1893), named var. pauciflorum Hartm. by Elfstrand in F. J. Hanbury’s herbarium.” The Rev. E. F. Linton, who has seen the whole gather- ing writes :—‘‘ I agree with Mr Marshall’s identification of your plant with his Inveroran specimen.”—-W. C. Barton.

Hieractum umbellatum L.? var. litorale Fr. [Ref. No. 48]. Rocky coast, Cobo, Guernsey, August 16, 1912. Mr Marshall reports on a specimen of this gathering :—“I have exactly’ the same plant from rocky coast near Cobo Castle, and lane near Vale Castle (W. F. Miller, 1892). It may deserve a special name, but I know of none. Perhaps only a state of poor, rocky ground.” Mr Linton, who has seen the whole gathering writes:—‘ Dr M. Elfstrand saw Cobo specimens of a dwarf H. wmbellatum in F. J. Hanbury’s herbarium, and was inclined to accept them as var. litorale Fr. |Your plant looks to me more like var. litorale than the var. littorewm Arv.-Touv. of Brit. Meracia.”—W. C. Barton.

Hieractum umbellatum L., var. linariifolium Wallr. [Ref. No. 3997]. Locally plentiful among the coast sandhills, Ansdell, W. Lancs, v.-c. 60, August 10, 1914. Styles livid; leaves narrow, with revolute edges. Some of the stronger plants approach var. coronopr- folium Fr.—E. 8. MarsHauu. ‘T agree.” —E. F. Linton.

Taraxacum erythrospermum And. {[Ref. No. 122]. Limestone rock, Bream Down, N. Somerset, v.-c. 6, April 26, 1914.—W. C. Barton. ‘Yes; the exposed situation accounts for its compactness.” —KE. S. MARSHALL.

Taraxacum spectabile Dahlst. [Ref. No. 11419]. Fassaroe, Wick- low, April 1914. Growing in the demesne of our member, Mr R. M.

$52 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Barrington, with whom I gathered it last April. I suspect it to be allied to spectabile, and have sent it to Herr Dahlsted for his confir- mation.—G.C. Druce. ‘TI hardly think so. Leaf surfaces practically glabrous. No flowers on my two specimens ; fruit not yet ripe. The habit is certainly not typical for 7’. spectabile. More like 7. palustre.” —KE. 8. MarsHat.

Campanula rotundifolia L., var. elongata Hampe. ,Lough Gill, Sligo, August 17, 1913. Differs from my No. 51 sent last year from the same locality in the absence of the pubescence clothing the lowe.’ part of the stem. The height of these plants is remarkable (up to 80 cm.); the lower leaves about 30 x 7-5 mm., while in the middle of the stem they are about 60 x 1°55 mm.—W. C. Barron. ‘This elongated state often occurs in Yorkshire. It is not worth a varietal name.” — -

J. Cryer. ‘‘The variety is unknown to me; if this is it, I should suppose it to be a drawn-up ‘state,’ due to growing among rank vegetation.” —E. 8. MarsHatu. “Yes, but I am not certain whether

itis more than a condition of growth.”—G. C. DRuce.

Lobelia Dortmanna L. Out of River Brathay, near Brathay Church, N. Lanes, v.-c. 69b, July 24, 1914.—C. WaTERFALL.

Calluna vulgaris Hull, forma. [Ref. No. 629]. On soil which is inundated every winter. Tiptree Heath, N. Essex, v.-c. 19, August 13, 1914. Plants small, prostrate, cymes ascending ; whole plant very pubescent, lighter green than type, which was in full bloom at time of gathering.—G.C. Brown. ‘Obviously a ‘state,’ due to the situation.” -—H. 8S. MARSHALL.

Daboecia cantabrica R. & B. Lower slopes of Errisbeg, Round- stone, Galway W., August 13, 1913.—W. C. Barron..

Limonium vulgare Mill, var. pyramidale Druce. Salt marsh, Key- haven, S. Hants, August 1914.—J. Comper. ‘Two specimens on my sheet. One is type; the other may pass as the ‘variety.’”—C. E. Satmon. ‘My specimen is very weak, but may pass.” —E. S. MArsHALL.

Limonium binervosum C. E. Salmon. Low place by sea, Hun- stanton, v.-c. 28, July 31, 1914.—_F. Ropinson. ‘“‘ Yes, Statice buner- vosa G. K. Sm.”—C, E. Saumon.

Limonium recurvum C. E. Salmon. Portland Island, v.-c. 9, July 14, 1914, with LZ. binervosum. Some of it was very much dwarfed. In fair quantity, and (I understand) a fairly safe situation. Some specimens of Zimoniwm.on the spot seemed to be rather off ordinary binervosum towards recurvum.—H. J. RippDELSDELL. ‘Small and rather untypical, but I think correctly named.”—C, EK, SALMon. —

REPORT FoR 1914. 153

Primula elatior Jacq. Wood, Great Sampford, N. Essex, v.-c. 19, April 10, 1914.—G. C. Brown.

Gentiana verna L. Widdy Bank Fell, v.-c. 66, in abundance, altitude 1500 feet, May 1, 1914.—J. Cryer.

Nymphodes peltatum Rendle & Brit. Shallow water, Scoulton Mere, v.-c. 28, July 16, 1914.—F. Ropinson. ‘The authority for Nymphodes peltatum is Otto Kuntze in his Rev. Gen. Pl.”—G. C. Druvce.

Amsinckia wmtermedia F. & M. (fide Kew). [Ref. No. 128.] Mildenhall, W. Suffolk, v.-c. 26, June 6, 1913.—W. C. Barron. ‘Probably, but the allied species are with difficulty distinguished.” — A. THELLUNG.

x Symphytum ceruleum Petitmengin (S. officinale L. a. ochroleucum x peregrinum). See Bucknall’s Revision, p. 550. Cultivated at Clifton, July, August, 1914.—J. W. Wuirz.

Symphytum grandiflorum DC. (S. wericum Stev.). Cultivated University Botanic Garden, Bristol, June, July 1914.—J. W. Wuire.

Linaria Hlatene Mill. Damp places on edge of cultivated land, Watton, v.-c. 28, August 16, 1914.—F. Rosrnson.

Veronica Anagallis L.? var. montioides (Boiss.) Hiern. Damp hollows in sand dunes, Freshfield, 8. Lanes, v.-c. 59, July 19, 1914.— W.G. Travis. ‘Probably so. I have gathered the same thing at Westenhanger, East Kent.”—E. 8S. Marsuauu. ‘Yes, but is it more than a seedling state?”—G. C. Druce.

Euphrasia nemorosa Pers. (fide J. A. Wheldon). Steep hilly field on line side near Broadsands, Churston, 8. Devon, v.-c. 3, July 7, 1913.—C. WarerFALL. ‘No; that is glabrous-leaved, whereas this is decidedly pilose. #. curta Wettst., var. glabrescens Wettst.”-— K. S. MarsHALt.

Euphrasia curta Wettst., b. glabrescens Wettst. (fide J. A. Wheldon). Open, bare hillside near Daddy Hole Plain, Torquay, S. Devon, v.-c. 3, June 16, 1913.—C. Warerratt. ‘In bad condition, but correct.”—-E. 8. MARsHALL.

Euphrasia occidentalis Wettst.? Cliffs above Tilly Whim, Dorset, July 20, 1914.—A. B. Jackson. “Yes; but plants not well selected.” —E. 8. Marsa...

154 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Euphrasia salisburgensis Funck. Coast of Connemara, Ireland, August 1906.—J. W. Wuitre. “ Excellent specimens.”—E. S. Mar- SHALL. ‘Yes, the most typical examples I have yet seen.”—G. C. DRvucer. |

Euphrasia Kernert Wettst. Chalk hills near Reigate, Surrey, Sept. 7, 1913.—A. B. Jackson, C. E. Satmon, J. Fraser. ‘“ Yes.”— E. S. MARSHALL.

Euphrasia foulaensis Towns. (fide E. S. Marshall). [Ref. No. 266]. Short pasture at top of cliffs at seashore, Grim Ness, South Ronaldshay, Orkney, altitude 50 feet, July 15, 1914. Nevne, eee fleshy ; cauline 2—6 toothed.—H. rey J OHNSTON.

Euphrasia gracilis Fr. [Ref. No. 118]. Marshy ground, Grande Mare, Guernsey, July 31, 1914. On specimens of this gathering sub- mitted for comment Mr Marshall remarked :—‘“[ think that this may be #. gracilis Fr., but am not sure. As a rule, that is a plant of rather dry ground.” Mr Bucknall replied :—-‘‘#. gracilis Fr., I think.” Most of the plants were growing in permanently water-logged soil, some in permanent water.—W. C. Barron.

Bartsia alpina L. In abundance on Widdy Bank, Teesdale, v.-c 66, altitude 1500 feet, June 6, 1914.—-J. Cryzr.

Rhinanthus stenophyllus Druce (Alectorolophus stenophyllus Ster- neck). [Ref. No. 3934]. Meadows near Crianlarich, Mid Perth, v.-c. 88, July 18, 1914.—E. S. MarsHatt.

Melampyrum pratense L., agg., var. [Ref. No. 11149]. Millook, Cornwall, June 1914.—G. G. Drucr. ‘My largest éxample is var. latifolium Schreb. & Mart., which Dr Moss regards as the type of the species, or near it. The smaller pieces only differ in being depauper- ate.” —H. S. MarsHA.t.

Orobanche major L. Near Cheddington, Bucks, August 1904.— G. C. Druce.

Utricularva major Schmidel. Pools at Restennet, Forfar, v.-c. 90, August 4, 1914.—R. & M. Corsrorpuine. “ No note as to the veining of the flowers, which is conclusive as to its being major. I suppose it must be so named, but the bladders are large, though not so large as in the F. gigantea Prahl. I think this is a new record for Forfar county 90, as Mr Marshall’s specimens thence were rather doubtful.” —A. Bennett. “ Yes, excellent examples showing the ‘ winter buds’ as well as the flowers.”—G. C. Druck.

REPORT FoR 1914. 5 H5)9)

Mentha longifolia Huds., b. nemorosa (Willd). [Ref. No. 85]. By ditch, Carbrooke Fen, v.-c. 28, August 20, 1914.—F. Rosinson. ‘So I should name it. Leaves rather short.”—E. 8. MARSHALL.

Mentha rotundifolia x longifolia = villosa Huds. Roadside near Dilty Moss, Forfar, v.-c. 90, September 7, 1914.—R. & M. Corsror- PHINE. ‘‘I believe this is correctly named.”—C. E. SaumMon. ‘Seems rather a good intermediate.” —E. S. MARSHALL.

Mentha citrata Ehrh. Origin Northaw, Herts (H. Peirson), Hort. Reigate, Surrey, September 1914. This is the plant of Pryor’s F1. Herts (1887), p. 336, where it stands as a variety of M. hirsuta. These specimens show the globular heads of MW. aquatica (hirsuta) and, whilst not absolutely glabrous, the whole plant is more so than in Mr White’s “ cetrata” from Priddy Nine Barrows (ep. for 1908, p. 393, and Wats. B.H.C. Rep. for 1909-10, p. 250). It will be noted, too, that the leaves are broader and more cordate than in Mr White’s plant—all points in favour of citrata. Ehrhart’s original description is extremely terse—‘ Folia ovata, petiolata, serrata, glabra. Capitula obtusa. Stamina corolla breviora.” Beitr. vii. (1792), p. 150.—C. E. SALMON.

Mentha hirsuta L., var. swb-glabra Baker. Crombie Den, near Arbroath, v.-c. 90, September 20, 1914.—R & M. Corstorpurnes. “Judging by examples named by Mr Baker I believe he would pass this as his variety.”—C. E. Satmon. “Probably. I have not seen Baker’s plant. A form, apparently referable to this, found in 1906 at Braemar by W. A. Shoolbred and myself, had the sweet scent of M. citrata.”—E. 8. MarsHatyu. “Yes, but not extreme.”—G. C. DRUCE.

Mentha Pulegium L., var. erecta Syme. Marshy ground, Limps- field Common, Surrey, August 23, 1914..-A. B. Jackson and J. Fraser. “This agrees much better with Rouy’s description of . vulgaris Briquet than with var. erecta Wirtgen, whose name antedates Syme’s.”—E. 8S. Marsnwary. ‘“ Yes, but Briquet in his Labiées, p. 93, gives the authority for erecta as Wirtgen.”——G. C. Druce.

Thymus Serpyllum L., var. Linneanus G. & G. [Ref. No. 126]. Edge of road, Albecq, Guernsey, July 31, 1914.—W. C. Barron. “This, I think, is our assumed type.”—E. S. MarsHa tu.

Stachys palustris x sylvatica. [Ref. No. 1238]. Green Lane, _ Merton parish, Surrey, July 18, 1914.—C. E. Brirron. “Yes; con- siderably nearer to S. palustris.”’—E. S. MarsHatu. “ Yes; and very like the figure of Smith’s ambigua in £.B., t. 2089.”—C. E. Satmon. Also from bank of stream, the Hall Dell, Melmerby, Cumberland,

156 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

v..c. 70, July 31, 1914.—Coll. Rev. W. W. Mason; comm. C. WaterFALL. Also from ditch near Duncan’s Cottages, Billingshurst, Sussex, July 14, 1914.—A. Wessrer. “TI believe so; but far closer to S. palustris.”,—E. 8. Marswatt. Also from the banks of the Leeds and Liverpool Canal, Shipley, v.-c. 64—with both parents, August 4, 1914.—J. Cryer. “8S. palustris x sylvatica, much on the palustris side.”—-E. 8. Marsnaty. “The specimens from Messrs Britton, Waterfall, Webster, and Cryer, all come under this hybrid.” —G. C. Druce.

Galeopsis angustifolia Khrh., var. canescens Schultes. [Ref. No. 114]. Avebury Down, N. Wilts, v.-c. 7, August 5, 1914.—W. C. Barton. ‘Yes; if Koch’s description of this variety is correct. He states that canescens has short, dense, patent hairs; angustifolia, ‘pili omnes adpressi.’ The former is surely our more common plant by far.”—C. E. SaLmon.

Leonurus Cardiaca L. Open wood and roadside, Hargham, v.-c. 28, June 29, 1914.—F. Rosrnson.

Lamium maculatum L. Hedgebank, roadside, Ovington, v.-c. 28, April 26, 1914.—F. Rosinson. a

Lamium purpureum L. Cultivated Dalton, v.-c. 69b, August 7, 1914. See Report 1913, p. 491. The following characters are maintained :—The long cotyledons; the variably fissile lower lip of the corolla; the asymmetrical sub-rhomboidal leaves; the absence of any cordate base; the shallow, very irregular toothing; the “dappling” of the leaves; the almost obsolete rugosity; the thin texture ; the short leaf-stalks—half inch at most. The plant is a very “shy” seeder; nearly all the seeds produced germinate.—D. Lums. “A very curious form, worth further study and perhaps a varietal name.”—-G. C. Druce.

Lamium purpureum L., 'var. decipiens auct. Denham, Bucks, June 1902.—G. C. Drucr. ‘Apparently a true variety of L. pur- purewm rather than its cross with L. hybridum.”— EH. 8. MarsHatt.

Ballota ruderalis Koch. Llamwarne, Herefordshire, July 18, 1914. —A. Wesster. “No, the teeth of the calyx in ruderalis should be from 2—4 mm. long; these are not 2mm. The calyx in ruderalis is more hairy. This is B. nigra.”—G. ‘C. Druce.

Teucrium Scordium L., var. Braunton Burrows, N. Devon, August 1896.—G. C. Druce.

Plantago ceratophylla Hoffmg. and Link. Seedlings. Cultivated Walton, 8S. Lancs, July-September 1914.—J. A. WHELDon.

REPORT FoR 1914. Soa

Plantago Coronopus L., var. [Ref. No. 4050]. Sandstone cliffs, Sidmouth, 8. Devon, v.-c. 3, June 8, 1914. Very large (all my gathering came from two plants) ; biennial.—E. S. MarsHatt.

Plantago Coronopus L., form or var. [Ref. No. 4049]. Sandy ground near the coast, Berrow, N. Somerset, v.-c. 6, June 4, 1914. Apparently biennial ; closely appressed to the ground. May be only a peculiar state of the type.—E. 8. Marswautu. ‘ P. Coronopus L., var. transiens Beguinot.”—R. M. Carprw and E. G. Baxer.

Plantago Lagopus L. [Ref. No. 717.] On cotton-seed refuse, Hythe Quay, Colchester, N. Essex, v.-c. 19, June 1914. Apparently referable to this, though the dark, villous part of the dorsal portion of the sepal is narrower than in that of an old specimen from the Isle of Elba in my herbarium.—G. C. Brown. “ Correct.”—E. G. Baker. “ Yes, forma glabris (corolle lobis extus glabris nec pilosis).” —A. THELLUNG.

Plantago major L., var. wmtermedia (Gilib.) Barnards Green, near Malvern, Worcester, v.-c. 37, August 17, 1914.—Coll. R. F. Townprow; comm. 8. H. Bickuam. ‘“ Plantago major L., var. intermedia Syme.” —R. M. Carprew and E.G. Baker. “ My single specimen differs from the description of P. intermedia in Williams Prodr. Fl. Brit., pp. 354-5. Not very hairy ; leaves not coarsely toothed towards the base, &c. But it comes near what is usually so named with us._-E. 8S. Marsnatu. Also sent from Sands of Barry, v.-c. 90, Aug. 10, 1914.—R. & M. Corsrorpuine. “The P. intermedia of Gilibert is an entirely-different plant. It is figured and described by this author in his Histovre des Plantes d Hurope in 1806. His figure shows a plant with sessile strongly serrate leaves, reaching 2 in. long, and 1 inch broad. The scapes are hairy, and the spikes dense and short. The whole plant rather suggests a form of P. media L.”— R. M. Carpew and E. G. Baker.

Plantago major L., var. minima DC. Malvern Common, Wor- cester, v.-c. 37, August 17, 1914.—Coll. R. F. Townprow; comm. S. H. Bickuam. “ Does not agree at all well with the description in DC. Prodromus, xiii. a, p. 695:—‘parvula pollicaris, foliis ovatis integris glabris in petiolum brevem attenuatis, pedunculis folia subaequantibus erectis vel ascendentibus, spicis ovatis vel ovato- capitalis.” The sepals are rounded-obtuse ; otherwise it is much like the plant sent as var. intermedia on a reduced scale.” —-E. S. MarsHALt.

Lllécebrum verticillatum L. Pine Wood near Wellington College, June 6, 1914.—A. Wepsrer.

Herniaria ciliata Bab. Lizard, W. Cornwall, v.-c. 1, August 20, 1914.—Coll. E. THurston ; comm. C. C. Vigurs.

158 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Chenopodium murale L. Trent Meadows, Nottingham, October 7,1914. This species was growing in fair abundance on waste ground adjacent to the site of the abortive Nottingham Exhibition of 1913. In the same field Crocus nudiflorus is abundant, and appears to be on the increase, owing to the erecting of palings for the above purpose around the station. With C’. murale grew C. opulifolium, C. olidum, C. rubrum, C. album, vars., etc., and many interesting casuals, such as Glaucuum luteum, an unexpected alien inland.—A. R. Horwoop. “Yes.” —G. C. Druce. ‘ My specimen is abnormal (probably injured); it may be the sub-var. microphyllum Coss. and Germ. = var. micro- phyllum Gircke, being very small-leaved, but its condition does not admit of certainty.”—E. 8. Marsuautu. Also sent from Newquay, W. Cornwall, v.-c. 1, December 1913.—C. C. Vieurs. ‘ Yes.”—U. E. Sautmon, E. 8S. MarsHatt, and G. C. Druce.

Chenopodium ficifolium Sm. Oakfield, Hitchin, Herts, v.-c. 20. With C. album and perhaps hybridising, September 9 ; fruit October 17, 1914.—J. BE. Lirrtze. “Surely not C. ficifolium, but a form of C. album L.”—J. Cryer. ‘“ Yes.” —E. 8. MArsHAL.t.

Chenopodium Vulvaria L. Seedlings. Albecq, Guernsey, July 31, 1914.—W. C. Barron.

Chenopodium hircinum Schrad., var. subtrilobum Issler. Wool waste heap, Selkirk, v.-c. 79, October 1913. Teste Dr Murr.— I. M. Haywarp.

Beta trigyna Waldst and Kit. Waste ground, St Philips, Bristol, June 20, 1914.—J. W. Wuitr. ‘“ Yes.”—G. C. Drucs.

Salicornia ramosissima Woods. Mud flats, Montrose Basin, v.-c. 90, September 20, 1914.—R. & M. Corstorpuine. “I would suggest that this is a small boreal form of S. herbacea L., forma patula Moss.”—E. 8. MarsHa.u.

Salicornia ramosissima Woods, forma. Mud flats, Montrose Basin, v.-c. 90, September 20, 1914.—R. & M. CorsrTorpPHINE. ‘Surely not ; spikes too obtuse. I think this to be S. gracillima Moss ; new for Scotland.” -—E. 8S. MARSHALL.

Salicornia dolichostachya Moss. Mud flats, Montrose Basin, v.-c. 90, September 20, 1914.--R. & M. Corsrorpuine. “ Yes, an interesting extension of its range in Great Britain. Sent to me fresh by the collectors last autumn from the same locality. It occurs in Denmark.” —C. E. Moss. “Just like plants gathered (in 1914) near Emsworth, Hants, which Dr Moss confirmed as being this species. Evidently closely allied to S. stricta.”—-C. E. Saumon. ‘“‘ Very characteristic ;

REPORT FOR 1914. 159

new for Scotland, I think. For years a specimen from Sandwich flats, E. Kent, collected by Mr G. Dowker, perplexed me ; it is a small form of this species.”—-E. S. MarsHatu.

Salicornia prostrata Pallas, var. Smithaana Moss and Salisbury. Mud flats, Montrose Basin, v.-c. 90, September 20, 1914.—R. & M. CorsTorPHINE. ‘I think so.”—-E. 8. MarsHa tt.

Polygonum lapathifolium L., var. Cornfield, Wigginton Heath, Oxon, July 29, 1914. Glands on perianth few, but the nut is that of this species. The variety deserves a name if a name is ever to be given for hairy leaves. Flowers darker than usual.—H. J. RippE.s- DELL. . “ Tvo slender, I believe, for any lapathifoliwm form ; it may be P. nodosum Pers., forma salicifolium Moss (P. incanum Willd.), though the stems are unspotted, and not swollen at the nodes ; or else a hybrid of that with P. Persicaria, to which it bears much resem- blance. The peduncle-glands are numerous, though shortly stalked.” —KE. 8S. Marswarty. ‘“ Under leaves with whitish down approaching var. incanum.”—G. C. DRUCE.

Polygonum sp. In an elevated sandy cornfield, c. 650 feet, on Wigginton Heath, Oxon, August 17,1914. Characterised by the remarkably narrow acute leaves and silvery ocree.—H. J. RippEts- DELL. “P. heterophyllum Lindm., sensu lato—probably a form of P. rurwagum Jord.”—G. C. Druce.

Polygonum ? Waste, stony ground, courtyard of Imperial Institute, September 19, 1914.—A. B. Jackson.

Polygonum aviculare L., var. ruriwagum Jord. Weed in field, Grey Abbey, County Down, September 27, 1914.—C. H. Wappz 1. ‘P. heterophyllum Lindm. forma; not, I think, rurwagum Jord.”— G. C, Druce.

Rumesx salicifolius Wien. Walton, 8. Lancs, August 20, 1914.— J. A. WHELDON.

Ulmus scabra Mill. Millwood, Dalton, v.-c. 69b, September 4, 1914. Two year old plants.—D. Lump.

Ulmus stricta Lindley. The Cornish Elm. Penpoll Quarry, Cran- tock, Newquay, W. Cornwall, March 15,1914. These flowering speci- mens from the same tree from which foliage was distributed in 1911 may be acceptable. This tree fell into a horizontal position some years ago, so that one can get at the top branches fairly easily. I hope to get fruit from it some year. The Cornish Elm does not fruit as freely as the Dutch, and even when it does the fruit is not easy to get, unless one is a very expert tree climber. I should be inclined to object to

160 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

the term ‘‘ pyramidal” applied to the outline of the Cornish Elm in the Cambridge Flora. I should say “cylindrical” would be a better term, though that is hardly correct, the longest branches being usually just below the top, and all the lower branches short and scattered. This is probably the reason why rooks prefer this tree to any other for nesting in.—C. C. Vieurs.

Ulmus glabra Huds. = U. montana Stokes. Trevowah, Crantock, Newquay, W. Cornwall, middle of May 1914. These specimens in good fruit are from one of the very few (Davey’s Flora notwithstanding) trees of this species in the county authoritatively named since the elms became better understood than they used to be. I think this species used to be confused with U. hollandica. This particular tree, named by Dr Moss, fruits well.—C. C. Vicurs. ‘‘ The petioles are rather long for U. montana. One would like to see examples with mature leaves.”— A. B. Jackson. ‘Looks right.”—E. 8. MArsHAt.t.

Alnus rotundifolia Mill, var. incisa. A fine tree, 40 feet high, planted in the Rectory Close, Wigginton, Oxon, September 1, 1914. Is this form of the alder native to the British Isles? Babington, ed. 9, gives it for Wigtonshire apparently as a native.—H. J. RipDELSDELL. ‘The inflorescence is that of A. glutinosa Gaertn., var. microcarpa Rouy.”—E. 8. Marswatu. “This is not the var. incisa, which has the leaves small and deeply incised, resembling those of the common hawthorn, but is the cut-leaved alder, A. glutinosa var. laciniata Willdenow Berlin Baumz. 44, 1796, which is frequent in cultiva- tion and often attains a large size, as at Syon House and Woburn. According to Duhamel it occurs wild in the north of France, particularly in Normandy, and in the woods of Montmorency near Paris.” —A. B. Jackson. ‘In Oxfordshire var. laciniata Willd. only occurs as a planted tree, and there are fine examples in “ The Parks” at Oxford. Wm. Cobbett is said to have planted a tree at Wolvercote. See Report 1909, p. 473. Dr Balfour was the authority for its occurrence in Wigtonshire (? native). Our late member, T. A. Stewart, found a specimen on the Black Mountain, Belfast, but he does not mention it in his “ora. It occurs (? planted) at Lakenham Bridge, and is said to be native in Northern France.”— G. C. Druce.

Salia triandra L. [Ref. No. 225]. Hedge, Earls Colne, N. Essex, v.-c. 19; flowers, April 30; leaves, August 23, 1914. Teste G. C. Druce.—G. C. Brown. ‘“ Rightly named.”—E. F. Linton. “Type (genuina Syme) I believe.” ——-E. 8S. MarsHatu.

Salix triandra L., 3 forma. [Ref. No. 229]. ‘The Moors,” Alphamstone, N. Essex, v.-c. 19, May 1914. See B.4.C. Report 1913, p. 496. I send a supply of male flowers to supplement leaf-specimens

REPORT FOR 1914. | 161

(September 21, 1913) sent last year from the same bush. The bush flowered profusely this year.—G. C. Brown. ‘No mature leaves ; but it looks like var. Hoffmanniana Bab.” —K. 8. MAarsHaAtt.

Salix purpurea L., 6. [Ref. No. 227.] Earls Colne, N. Essex, v.-c. 19; flowers, April 30; leaves, August 23, 1914.—G. C. Brown. “Correct.” —E. F. Linron. “Seems to come under the type (vera Ritschl).”—E. 8. MarsHat..

Salix Forbyana Sm. Lowland near Brent Knoll, N. Somerset, April and August 1902.—J. W. Waite. “Rightly named.’—E. F. Linton. ‘A _ broad-leaved S. purpurea x viminalis, which I think answers to this name.”—E. 8. MarsHa.t.

Salix aurita aut cinerea x viminalist=S. ferruginea G. Anderson? Meadows near Long Ashton, N. Somerset, v.-c. 6, April, May, and August 1913.—J. W. Wuirr. ‘The male specimen is S. cinerea x viminalis ; the female probably S. aurita x viminalis. The foliage looks rather as if it belonged to the latter, but is wanting in decisive features, and there is nothing to show whether it is from the male or the female bush, or from either. I have remarked before on the objectionable practice of sending male and female specimens on the same sheet, unless, of course, there is no doubt that both belong to the same species. In this case the result of the mixture gives a very un- satisfactory result.—E. F. Linron. ‘This I consider to be S. cinerea x viminalis.”— E. 8. MARSHALL.

Salix phylicifolra (L.) Sm. [Ref. No. 1822.] (Name confirmed by E. F. Linton). Grassy banks at burnside, altitude 50 feet, Burn of Stennadale, Firth, Mainland, Orkney ; flowers, June 3 ; leaves, August 5, 1914. Native, common. A straggling shrub with sub-erect or erect stems, 1—2 feet high.—H. H. Jounnston.

Ceratophyllum submersum L. Pond, Castle Morton, Worcester, v.-c. 37, August 27, 1914. I understand that Dr C. E. Moss prefers to call the C. submersum var. apiculatum of Dalla Torre and Sarntheim. Coll. R. F. Townprow ; comm. 8. H. BickHam. “This plant is, in my opinion, C. demersum, var. apiculatum = C. apicula- tum Cham. I have never gathered C. submerswm in any inland county, and have only seen British specimens from southern England —Somerset to Norfolk. The var. apiculatum is intermediate between C.. demersum and C. submersum, and it is somewhat arbitrary to refer it to one of the species rather than the other, but I prefer to put it to C. demersum, simply because this plan enables one to determine the two species in absence of ripe fruit. I agree that in fruit characters the variety is not far from C. submersum, and I

should not complain if the two species were reduced to one,”— C. E. Moss.

162 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Ceratophyllum demersum L. Pond, Little Malvern, Worcester, v.-c. 37, August 25, 1914. Teste C. E. Moss—z.e., specimens from the same pond were passed. Dr Moss has not seen these individual examples.—Coll. R. F. Townprow ; comm. S. H. BickHam.

Epipactis palustris Crantz, var. ericetorum Asch. & Grabn. Sandhills, Ainsdale, 8. Lancs., v.-c. 59, July 5, 1914.—W. G. Travis. ‘‘In my opinion, merely a state due to environment.”—J. CRYER. ‘Approaching Helleborine palustris, var. ericetorum (A. & G.) Druce, but more luxuriant than the specimen I gathered there in 1911, and with narrower leaves.” —G. C. Druce.

Orchis wncarnata L. Damp flats, Sands of Barry, v.-c. 90, June 13, 1914.—R. & M. CorsrorpHing. ‘“ Yes, a small form.”— K. S. MarsHaAtt.

Orchis praetermissa Druce. [Ref. No. 643.] Meadows, Henny, IN. Essex, v.-c.) V9) diulye2i el Ole: Flowers varying from pale rose-purple to deep purple; lip almost flat, varying somewhat in markings and shape, but always as broad as long. Many of the bracts are coloured. Despite every care, I was unable to preserve the colour of the flowers.—G C. Brown. ‘In Gibbons Brook, Kent, at Cray, in Mid-West Yorks, and near Silverdale, in Lancashire, I have found every shade of colour in the flowers of different specimens from light flesh colour to ‘dark crimson purple,’ and apart from the shade of colour I find no distinguishing character whereby they can be separated. In these three stations the plants with different shades of colour bloom at the same time. The sides of the lip in every instance were reflexed, and so they are in this specimen. I should call it Orchis incarnata L.”—J. Cryer. ‘As I have not yet seen the description, these specimens are very welcome. For many years I have believed that our wncarnata included two or more species. As far as one can judge from dried material, this is what Max Schulze (Orchidaceen Deutschlands und der Schweiz, tab. 19) figures as O. wncarnata L.—not the Linnean plant. I have found it in several southern and eastern counties.”—E. 8. Marsuaty. ‘The middle lobe of labellum is longer than in the type, and suggests the presence of maculata. I should like to see it in the fresh state.” —G. C. Druce.

Aceras anthropophora Br. Calcareous pastures, near Barnack, Northants, v.-c. 32, May 30,1914. The stems of most of the specimens gathered had been withered by very late frosts. It is rather curious that the orchis should have been surprisingly abundant this year.— G. Custer. Also from chalk downs, Reigate, Surrey, May 31, 1913.— C. E. SaLmon.

Ophrys apifera Huds. Clay soil, railway cutting, Saham Toney, y.-c, 28, June 24, 1914.—F, Rosinson,

REPORT FoR 1914. 163

Habenaria virescens Druce. Damp wood, Griston, v.-c. 28, June 17, 1914.—F. Rosrnson.

Leucojum vernum L. [Ref. No. 4056]. Discovered by Miss M. A. Hellard, between Bishop’s Lydeard and Williton, 8S. Somerset, v.-c. 5, February 24, 1914. A very welcome novelty for this county. It grows in good quantity over a limited area. —E. 8. MArsHALt.

Asparagus officinalis L., a. altilis L. Sandhills, Freshfield, v.-c. 59, July 1914.—W. G. Travis.

Allvum sphaerocephalum L. St Vincent’s Rocks and Durdham Down, Bristol, July 27 and 31, 1911. The larger-headed specimens are from the former locality, and those with smaller heads from the latter. The plant is too scarce for any extensive gathering, and no bulbs have been taken for the Club. The few now sent had been pulled up and thrown aside by scrambling boys, who, in attempting to gather the flowers, had uprooted the plant from the loose thin soil on the rocks.—J. W. WHITE.

Allium sibtricum L. Predannock Downs, Lizard, West Cornwall, v.-c. 1, June 11, 1914.—Coll. E. Tuurstron ; comm. C. C. Viaurs.

Allium Schenoprasum L. ‘‘Chivey Syke,” v.-c. 69b, June 8, 1914. I send these few flowers, without bulbs, to confirm Miss Hodgson’s old record. A vandal, at one visit, could easily make the plant non- existent here.—D. Lump.

Allium satwum L., var. Ophioscorodon Doell. [Ref. No. 4905]. Ex Mull of Galloway, July 1912.—G. C. Druce.

Fritillaria Meleagris L. Damp shady pasture, Ovington, v.-c. 28, April 27, 1914.—F. Rosinson. ‘Not given for West Norfolk in Top. Bot.” —G. C. Druce.

Paris quadrifolia L. Damp wood, Seamere Wood, Hingham, v.-c. 28, March 21, 1914.—F. Rospinson.

Juncus maritumus Lam., var. atlanticus mihi. Salt-marsh, St Mary’s, Scilly, September 5, 1914. By the kindness of Mrs Stideford of “Lunnon” I am enabled to distribute another parcel of this interesting rush. My correspondent secured some good stems before the marsh was mown, but has cut them shorter than is perhaps desirable. In my note on this plant (Jowrn. Bot. January 1914, p. 19) I proposed for it the varietal name atlanticus, having concluded that the allied form J. rigidus Desv. (Rouy Fl. de France), described as “forte, rigide,” could not be identical. That description indeed

164 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

seems to fit the type maritimus of this country rather than the variation under notice, which has a rather weak slender stem from four to five feet high Still, as Dr Moss has suggested, it will be well to compare this plant with specimens of J. rigidus in the Rouy Herbarium at Paris when an opportunity offers ; and until that can be done the name at/anticus should be regarded as provisional. Examples in some degree approaching the Scillonian form have been lately for- warded from Poole Harbour, Dorset, by my friend Mrs E. P. Sandwith. The following brief description may suttice to define this variety :— Culmo subtenue, elato, ad 10-—15 dem. producto. Anthela magna (24—4 dem. longa) diffusa, abunde decomposita, bracteam jfloralem inferiam multo superante. Cetera ut typi. With reference to the comments of Professor Lindman and Mr Adamson in the Report for 1913, p. 499, I would say that no botanist who had seen it growing in masses over a large area could possibly suppose this plant to be a monstrosity ; and would ask how any state of luxuriance could so shorten the lower bract, not merely in relation to its own panicle, but in relation to that of a non-luxuriant type.—J. W. Wuirrt. “TI find in my herbarium a specimen of this interesting variety, collected by Mr A. Somerville, in July 1890, in the same station (Mr White con- firms the name). This shows that the variation is not merely a ‘ state,’ ‘here to-day, gone to-morrow,’ which is interesting in the face of some of the comments on p. 499, B.#.C. Rep. 1913.”—C. E. Satmon. “It certainly is a peculiar form. Only one variety is given by Ascherson and Graebner in their Syn. Flor. Mitt.-Hur. 1904, p. 456, and that is a very local plant.”—-A. Bennert. “A well-marked variety, in my opinion ; contrasting greatly with a slender, narrow-panicled plant found on the Lancashire coast-sands.”.--E. S. MarsHAtt.

Juncus filiformis L. Derwentwater, Cumberland, August 1902.-— G. C. Druce.

Juncus bulbosus L., var. uliginosus (Fr.) Druce. [Ref. No. 103. ] Wet lane, Petit Bo, Guernsey, August 6, 1912.—W.C. Barton. “Sol should name it.”—C. E. Satmon. ‘This is not var. uliginosus, which is a procumbent form seldom “bulbous” and with three stamens. The present plant has six stamens with the anthers only about one-third the length of the filaments. It would apparently come under the var. Kochia = J. ngritellus Koch non D. Don. This is generally described as having the capsule equal or shorter than the perianth, not much longer, as in the present case. IJ know this long-pointed form from many woodland districts. On further examination of the plants sent by Mr Barton last year from Roundstone, Co. Galway, it would appear they are the same as this, and not J. bulbosus £. uligynosus, as previously reported.”—R. 8. Apamson. ‘I look upon this simply as a viviparous condition, not a true variety.”—-E. S, MARSHALL.

REPORT FoR 1914. 165

Juncus tenuis Willd. Roadsides, Crianlarich, Mid Perth, v.-c. 88, July 15, 1914.—-E. 8S. MarsHatu.

Juncus bufonius L., var.? Sandy shore, at high watermark, Ballywalter, Co. Down, August 1914. These plants are frequently overflowed by the tide. I suppose the sepals are too sharp for var. ranarvus.—C. H. Wappety. “This is apparently the plant described as var. ranarius = J. ranarius, but the original description of J. ranarius Song. et Perrier says that the perianth is shorter than the capsule and the inner obtuse, while in this plant the perianth segments are all acute and exceed the capsule. A specimen in Camb. Univ. Herbarium, issued by Perrier, of J. ranarius is a very different plant, that so far I have not seen in this country. The present plant would come under /. ranariws sensu Asch. and Graebner Syn. Mitt. Fl. u., 2, 1904, p. 432, or J. insulanus Viv. in Rouy /7/. Fr. xiii., 1912, p. 252, which Buchenan treats as the same as J. bufonius var. fasciculatus Koch. The oldest varietal name would seem to be var. congestus Wahlb. (1820), but I have not seen the description.” —R. S. Apamson. ‘I have just the same thing from Starcross, 8. Devon (October 1888); and New Romney, E. Kent (July 1891). Much paler than var. fascoiculatus Koch, the individual flowers being as a rule fully twice as long. My only sheet labelled J. ranarius Nees, from Southport, 8. Lancs, is too dwarf and poor to give much help, but I suspect that all these gatherings may belong to it.”-E. S. Marsuatu. “This is what I called fasciculatus.”—G. C. DRvce.

Juncoides Foster Sm. Thicket near Colwall, Herefordshire, v.-c. 36, May 9, 1914.—C. WarerraLy. “ Right.”—E. 8S. MARsHALL. Also from Harefield, Middlesex, v.-c. 21, May 4, 1913.—W. C. Barron.

Luzula multiflora DC., var. congesta (Lej.). Tiptree Heath, N. Essex, v.-c. 19, May 5, 1914.—G. C. Brown.

Sparganiwm neglectum Beeby. By the Dane Stream, Milford-on- Sea, S. Hants, v.-c. 11, August 1914. —J. ComsBrr. ‘ Probably correct, but less ‘gradually attenuated’ than in the original specimens of Mr Beeby.”—A. Brnnetr. “The specimen before me is useless, having no good fruit ; I received a better one through the Watson Exchange Club. From the very numerous fruits, many of them somewhat angular (or ‘shouldered’) at the broadish base, I would name it S. erectum, var. microcarpum.”— KE. 8S. MARSHALL.

Sparganium minimum Fr. Borough Fen, Northants, August 1910. A new county record. Here over a small area it was plentiful.—G. C. Druce.

166 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Damasonium Alisma Mill. Hook, N. Hants, August 1910.— G. C. Druce. . :

Scheuchzerva palustris LL. [Ref. No. 3941]. Bog near Rannoch Station, Mid Perth, v.-c. 88, July 17, 1914; fruiting freely. I after- wards found it in another swamp not far off, in leaf only.—E. S. MARSHALL.

Potamogeton Zizi Koch. Crooked drain, near Ely, Cambridge, June 2, 1884.—H. and J. Groves. ‘Is P. praelongus Wulfen.”—A. BENNETT.

Potamogeton decipiens Nolte. Canal, Market Harboro, Leicester- shire, v.-c. 55, July 19, 1914.—G. Cuestrer. “ Yes, very fair example ot Nolte’s plant.” A. BENNETT.

x Potamogeton Linton Fryer. Canal, Renishaw, Derby, October 1911. A supposed hybrid of crispws and Fries. It grew in consider- able quantity and with some amount of variability in the Renishaw Canal, to which place I went in order to show Dr Glick x Apiuwm Moorer wm situ.—G. C. Druce. “Yes. P. crispus x Friesu Fryer. This was gathered near Sheen in Surrey in 1912, C. E. Salmon sp.” —A. BENNETT.

Potamogeton acutifolius Link. Water course near Wareham, Dorset, June 30, 1914.—J. W. Wuitr. “Yes; the smaller form of the species.”—A. Brennerr. ‘Yes, from a well-known locality, in which I have gathered it.”—E. 8S. MarsHaty. Also from deep pool, Staines, Middlesex, July 19, 1879, and July 29, 1882.—H. Groves.

Potamogeton trichoides Cham. and Schlecht. Ditch near Horsey, E. Norfolk, July 10, 1912.—J. Groves. ‘I suppose must be so named. It differs from the typical specimens in the Berlin Herbarium by the leaves being mostly three-veined and the fruit not so broad, and the projecting pit being in the circumference of the fruit, not outside it. It differs from the usual British plant by not being tuberculate on the dorsal margin, this being the var. Z’rummeri of Dr Caspary.”—-A. Bennett. ‘Evidently later-flowering than most of our species; no fruit present the second week in July.”— EK. 8. MarsHa.u.

_ Potamogeton marinus L. Coldisham Loch, Berwick, August 1906. In great quantity, preferring the shelter of Castalia. I use the older and, I believe, the correct Linnean name in preference to that of Nolte.—G. C. Drucr. ‘Yes, characteristic examples of Nolte’s P. filuformis.”— A. BENNETT,

REPORT FOR 1914. 167

Naias fleails R. & 8. Esthwaite Water, v.-c. 69b, August 14, 1914. The dominant species in a remarkable association (see Hydrilla verticllata). Although the species fruits freely it is so abundant that it must have been established here for some considerable time. — W. H. Pearsauy. “ An excellent addition to the English flora. Mr Pearsall sent me the first specimens found, asking if it was not Naias, and with these specimens a scrap of what I at once saw could only be Hydrilla verticillata Caspary, which was an addition to the flora of the British Isles. Taking the Irish, Scottish, and English specimens of the Maras, they seem to accord with the American plant, and, so far as [ have seen, specimens show no approach: to the var. microcarpa Nilsson from Lake Ruigsj6n in Scania, Sweden. Of this I possess original specimens from Herr Nilsson. This isa smaller plant than ours—4-10 cm. to 1-50 dm. high, with fruit only 2—2-25 mm. long. In Europe Maas occurs in Finland; Russia, in Lithuania, Olentz, and Borussia; Germany, in Pomerania, Marchin ! (Pasteiner-See, &c.); Sweden, Upland! (formerly) and Scania! ; N. America, from Labrador to New England States across to Oregon. This shows what may be expected when our English Lakes are investi- gated as the Scottish ones have been by Mr W. West.”—A. Bennerv.

Hydrilla verticillata Casp. Esthwaite Water, v.-c. 69b, July 31, 1914. New to Britain. Grows in slightly coloured water at about 8 feet, and is invisible from the surface. Associated with it are Maias flexilis, Pot. pusillus, Pot. Sturrockii, and Callitriche autumnalis—the first named being dominant. SHlodea canadensis, though abundant elsewhere in the lake, is not included in this interesting linear-leaved association. The plant is uniformly pale green in colour, extremely slender and brittle. The branching is mainly below, the long resultant erect shoots being nearly simple. The internodes are 2 inch to % inch (rarely 1 inch) in length and therefore much more distinct than those of Hlodea. The leaves are most often in whorls of 5, but 3’s and 4’s are frequent, and near the base of the shoots whorls of 3 shorter and broader leaves are common. The leaves are narrowly linear, pellucid, usually just over 4 inch long, patent, acute, and minutely serrulate The teeth are few, small, very acute, antrorse, extra marginal, more distant below, and best seen near the apex. J am informed that the leaves are more nearly entire than those of other European specimens of this species at Kew. I was unable to find flowers, but winter buds were prominently shown on specimens gathered later in the season.—W. H. PEARSALL. “ Hydrilla verticillata, var. gracilis.,—A. J. Witimorr in lit. “I refer it to var. pomeranica (Reichb.). See B.#.C. Report 1914, p. 22.” —G. C. Druce.

Ervocaulon septangulare With. Craigga More, Galway W., August 14, 1913.—W. C. Barton.

168 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Eleocharis uniglumis Schultes. Slacks in dunes, Freshfield, S. Lanes, v.-c. 59, July 19, 1914..—W. G. Travis.

Eleocharis multicaulis Sm. Name confirmed by Arthur Bennett. [Ref. No. 227.] Marsh 30 feet above sea level, Valley Burn, Rackwick, Hoy, Orkney, June 23 and September 9, 1914. Native. Common in several small marshes.—H. H. JoHNSToN.

Scirpis filrformis Savi, var. monostachys Hook. Freshfield, 8. Lancs, v.-c. 59, July 17, 1914.—W. G. Travis. Also sent from damp ground, sea cliffs, Milford-on-Sea, 8. Hants, v.-c. 11, August 1914.— J. Comper. “ Yes.”-—E. S. MARSHALL.

Scirpus fluitans L. Near Yarnton, Oxon, June 1914. Sent in order to put on record a curious instance of plant occurrence. S. fluitans is one of our rarest species, being only known from two localities, neither of which has recently yielded it. The place where I found it last year was well known to me in the eighties, as it was then a shallow piece of water, rich in Charas. Since 1900 the water level of one area has sunk, and vegetation—Curex, Sparganium, Iris, we., have asserted themselves. In the dry period when I visited it there was but little water, but the surface of the wet ground was covered with masses of this Scirpus, which must have been brought, probably by aquatic birds, and finding a congenial home, with little competition, was thus enabled to make in a few years this remarkable increase.—G. C. DRUCE. |

Eriophorum angustifolium Roth, var. alpinwm Gaudin = var. minus Koch = EH. gracile Smith, non Roth. [Ref. No. 3943]. Plentiful in bogs, north-east corrie of Ben Chaluim, Mid Perth, v.-c. 88, from 2300 to 2500 feet, July 20, 1914.--E S. Marsnauy. “ Yes, and as usual with Mr Marshall’s gatherings beautifully preserved ; strictly speaking I suppose the spikes should be pedunculate.”---G. C. DRuce.

s

Carex vesicaria L. Marshy places, Naseby reservoir, Northants, v.-c. 32, June 20, 1914. Spikelets appear to be much more closely sessile than usual:—G. CuHrstEr. ‘Spikelets appear more closely sessile than usual. Yes, this is so, but it varies greatly in this, the other extreme (f. pendulina) has the lowest spikes drooping with stalks three inches long.”—-A. Bennert. ‘Very fine. In Scotland and Ireland it usually has similar short, stout, sub-sessile female spikelets.” —H. 8S. MarsHatt.

x Carex csomadensis Simonkai in Hnum. Pl. Transs. 556, 1887, = C. riparia x vesicaria. [Ref. No. 4919]. Marshy meadow, Gren- don Underwood, Bucks, July 1911. In considerable abundance,

REPORT FoR 1914. 169

Some specimens shaded off to vesicaria; others approached riparia. It is evidently a rare hybrid.—G. C. Druce.

Carex strigosa Huds. Penn Wood, Bucks, June 1904.—G. C. DRUCE.

Carex capullaris L. On the Sugar-loaf Limestone of Cronkley Fell, v.-c. 65, altitude 2000 feet, June 9,1914. Growing in close association with Thalictrum alpinum L., Helianthemum canum Baumg., var. vineale (Pers.) and Viola Riviniana Reichb., forma minor Murb.—J. Cryer.

Carex binervis Sm. Near the Duddon Estuary, 1912. Coll. D. Lump, ex G. C. Druce.

Carex distans L. (Non C. distans v. maritima auct. = C. neglecta Degl.). Wet meadows in Parish of Tredington, Worcestershire (an inland station), July 1903. See Report 1903, p. 28.—Coll. F. TOWNSEND ; comm. G. C. DRUCE.

Carex Julva Host. [Ref. No. 641.] Chippenham Fen, Cambridge, v.-c. 29, June 14, 1914.—G. C. Brown.

Carex Oederi Retz., var. elatior Anderson Cyp. Scand. 25, 1849. Wicken Fen, Cambridgeshire, July 1904. L. H. Bailey’s unfortunate attempt to displace C’. Oederi Retz., and use it for a form of C. flava caused much confusion among British botanists, the effects of which have not yet ceased. The fact is C. Oederi has almost as close relation with extensa as it has with flava, and is a good species distinct from both. The more usual state is a very small plant especially fond of the gravelly margins of pools and lochs, but in our calcareous fen areas this robust plant occurs.—G. C. DRuce.

Carex polygama Schkuhr (C. Buxbaumi Wahl.). Arisaig, Westerness, July 1903. Very local. The only known locality, since it appears to have become extinct at Harbour Island, Lough Neagh, where I vainly sought for it on two occasions in 1903.—

G. C. Druce.

Carex salina Wahi. Wick, Caithness, July 1907.—G. C. Druce.

Carex gracilis Curt. |Ref. No. 640]. Chippenham Fen, Cambridge, v.-c. 29, June 14, 1914. One large tuft—specimen rather gone over, but characteristic.—G. C. Brown. ‘A slender form. I did not see this on the Fen when with the late Mr Fryer, but we saw good C. stricta Good. C. gracilis is a local species in Cambridgeshire.” — A. Brennerr. ‘“ Yes.”—E. 8S. Marswatu. ‘My specimen is an im-

170 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

perfect one, but from the early falling of the fruits (June 14) and the amount of filamentous material on the leaf.sheaths—I would suggest comparing it with C. elata.”—G. C. DrRuce.

Carex gracilis Curt., var. gracilescens Almq.? Naseby reservoir, Northants, v.-c. 32, June 20, 1914. Differs much frum type, but hardly sure if it can come under gracilescens.—G. CHESTER. ‘* Agrees very closely with the Cambridgeshire specimens so named for me by Dr Almquist.”—A. Bennerr. ‘I believe so.”—-E. S. MARsHALt. “Yes, a characteristic plant of the reservoir and a frequent form in Northamptonshire, where Mr Chester has been doing excellent work.” —G. C. Druce.

Carex muricata L. Meadow, Malvern Wells, Worcester, v.-c. 37, June 26, 1914.—Coll. R. F. Townprow; comm. 8. H. BickHam. ‘I put this under C. Patraet F. Schultz, of which I have seen an authentic specimen at the British Museum. I have recently gathered it in Surrey, Berks, and Middlesex. It appears to be a plant of some- what moister situations than C. contigua Hoppe (C. muricata auct.). It seems to be widely distributed in Britain, for I have seen specimens from at least seventeen English and Scotch, and one Irish county.”— A. B. Jackson. ‘Is, I suppose, the segregate plant apart from Pavraev.”— A. Bennerr. “ Yes, the true Linnean plant = C. Pairaer F. Schultz.” —E. 8. MarsHatt.

Carex contigua Hoppe x divulsa Good.? [Ref. No. 4060.] Growing with the supposed parents on a grassy roadside near West Monkton, S. Somerset, v.-c. 5, June 20, 1914. Intermediate in characters. More advanced material could not be obtained, as all the herbage had been mown a week later. I believe that the suggested origin is right; if so, it appears to be a new hybrid for Britain.—E. 8. Marsnauy. “TI do not feel I can pass an opinion on these hybrids ; the finder is so much better prepared to do so, seeing them im situ.” —A. BENNETT.

Carex divulsa x vulpina. Ditchside, Bransford, Worcester, v.c. 37, June 15 and 22, 1914. The specimens are from the same locality as those sent last year. See Report 1913, p. 506.—Coll. R. F. Townprow ; comm.S8. H. BickHam. “If so, it would seem that divulsa is the dominant plant in it.”—A. Bennerr. ‘I am by no means convinced that this is a hybrid. Does it ripen its fruit ?”— G. C. Drucr. Also sent from roadside ditch, Leigh Sinton, Wor- cester, v.-c. 37, July 28, 1914. These specimens are from a new locality to those of this plant sent last year.—Coll. R. F. Townprow ; comm. 8S. H. Bickuam. ‘This was sent to me fresh; a good inter- mediate.”— EH. 8S. Marswauu. ‘“ Mihi valde dubia forsan mera forma (abnormis) C’. divulsae.”—A. THELLUNG.

REPORT FoR 1914. 171

Carex paniculata L. [Ref. No. 75.] Marsh by river, Mundford, v.-c. 28, June 18, 1914.—F. Rosinson.

Carex paradoxa Willd. |Ref. No. 72.] Shady marsh land, Hockham, v.-c. 28, July 11, 1914.---F. Rosinson. “Yes, character- istic specimens. It was growing with Deyeuaia neglecta Kunth = Calamagrostis stricta Nutt. A new record for Norfolk, of a rare British species.,—A. Bennerr. ‘Correct; fruit fully ripe.”—E. S. MarsHaLu. “* Yes, not given in 7Z'op. Bot. for West Norfolk.”—G. C. DRvce.

Carex chordorrhiza Ehrh. Marsh near the Tubeg of Mudal, Sutherland, July 1907.—G. C. Druce.

Spartina alterniflora Lois. Hill Head, near Titchfield, Hampshire, September 13, 1914. These specimens came from its most easterly recorded station on Southampton Water, where it is apparently having a hard struggle for existence with S. Zownsendi. Dr F H. Arnold’s Sussex station, further east, ‘Thorney, not far from Pilsey, September 18, 1900” (Suss. Fl., ed. 2, 1907, p. 124) has never, I believe, been confirmed. Mr Standen and I failed to see it there this year. Most of the dried specimens of S. alterniflora that I have seen appear to have a narrower leaf than in S. Zownsendi, but this, I think, is due to their becoming more decidedly involute than those of Townsendi when being dried. Although some care was taken to try and avoid this, members will see I have not been wholly successful.—C. E. Satmon. “Right. IEPf S. Zownsends is really a hybrid between this and S. stricta, it is an exception to the general rule, being so much stouter and brighter green than either.”—E. 8. MarsHaAtt.

Phalaris minor Retz. Cultivated ground, Paradis, Guernsey, August 2, 1914.—W. C. Barron.

Phalaris canariensis L. Waste ground, Bumpas Lane, Zealand Road, Chester, v.-c. 58, September 28, 1914.—C. WaTERFALL.

Alopecurus bulbosus Gouan. [Ref. No. 35.) Thick marsh near sea, by Burgh Castle, Yarmouth, v.-c. 27, May 11, 1914.—F, Rosinson. ‘ Correct.” —E. 8S. MarsHa tt.

Agrostis alba L., var stolonifera L. Side of ditch, Keyhaven, 8. Hants, v.-c. 11, August 1914.—J. ComBsr.-—‘‘ Very good.”—E. 8. MarsHatut. ‘“ Var. prorepens Koch, the Linnean stolonifera is doubt- ful and may be = verticillata Vill.” —G. C. Druce.

Calamagrostis canescens Druce (lanceolata Roth). Damp wood, Thompson, v.-c. 28, July 4, 1914.—F. Ropinson. Also from Mow Fen,

172 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Shouldham, W. Norfolk, v.-c. 28, June 24, 1914.—J. E. Lirrie. ‘“ Yes (C’. canescens Druce).”—E. 8. MarsHAL.

Deyeuaxia neglecta Kunth, [Ref. No. 7541.] Near Loch Watton, Caithness, July 1907.—G. C. Druce. Also from [Ref. No. 71] shady marshland, Shropham Hundreds, Norfolk, v.-c. 28, July 11, 1914.—F. Rosinson. Also from [ Ref. No. 37] Loch Scarmclett, Caithness, July 1907. These are typical plants which are locally plentiful there.— G. C. DRuce.

Deyeuxia neglecta Kunth, var. scotica. [Ref. No. 36.] Loch Wat- ton, Caithness, July 1907. This has more acuminate glumes and is the plant which was recorded as strigosa by Mr Arthur Bennett in Journ. Bot. 1885, p. 253. I went to visit Dick’s locality for the plant which was called lapponica in Smiles’ Life of Robert Dick, and found only this form growing there. Afterwards I saw it near Loch Scarmclett. It really approaches strigosa in appearance, but does not agree with it in the length of the callus hairs, which are of the length of the floret in strigosa, which has also a broader and laxer panicle. D. strigosa, Prof. Hackel thinks, is probably a hybrid of epigeios and neglecta, and he is quite confident in rejecting these as strigosa. It is sufficiently distinct from normal neglecta to warrant a varietal name, var. scotica, characterised as ‘“ Panicles larger and more diffuse than type, glumes longer, and more longly acuminate.—G. C. Druck.

Gastridium ventricosum Sch. & Th. Copyhold, Sussex, September 1902. Once again the name must be changed in order to comply with the Actes. The trivial lendigerum dates from Sp. Pl., ed. ii., 1762 or 1763, but prior to that it was published as Agrostis ventricosa by Gouan, and must stand as G. ventricosum (Gouan) Thellung.—G. C. Druce.

Apera Spica-ventr Beauv. By River Orwell, Freston, v.-c. 25, July 13, 1915.—G. C. Brown.

Apera interrupta Beauv. [Ref. No. 79.| Oatfield, Tottington, v.-c. 28, July 31, 1914.—F. Rosinson. ‘ Apera Spica-venti Beauv. —-J. Cryer and W.G. Travis. “This is A. Spica-venti Beauv., var. purpurea Rouy, distinguished not only by its purplish tint, but by the outer and inner glumes being longer and more acuminate. Compare | Mr G. C. Brown’s Apera Spica-venti Beauv., from Freston, v.-c. 25, which hag paler, shorter glumes (especially the inner), and is the sub-var. virescens Rouy.”—C. E. Brirron. “Surely this is A. Spica- venti. Panicle large, broad, brownish, not interrupted.”—E. S8. MarsHatut. Also from sandy wayside, near Barnack, Northants, v.-c. 32, July 5, 1914.—G. Cuesrer. “I am afraid only adventitious in Northants, and of course so in South Lancs.”—-G. C. Druce. Also

REPORT FOR 1914. ne 83;

from sandy roadside, Freshfield, v.-c. 59, July 5, 1914.—J. A. WHELDON and W.G. Travis. Also from sandy land, Cockley Cley, Swaffham, W. Norfolk, v.-c. 28, June 23, 1914.—J. E. Lirrniz. “Fine and characteristic.” —E. S. MARSHALL.

Corynephorus canescens Beauv. The Denes, Great Yarmouth, E. Norfolk, v.-c. 27, 1913.—Coll. Dr F. Lone; comm. G. C. Brown. Also from North Denes, Great Yarmouth, v.-c. 27, August 13, 1914. —F. Ropinson. “ Yes, the var. maritumus Godron F7. Fr. ii., p. 502. The common British plant.”-—G. C. Druce.

Aira caryophyllea L., forma. Petit Bo Cliffs, Guernsey, April 1907. On ground where gorse had been burned the previous year. Growing in prostrate tufts, much resembling Azra praecox.—G. C. Druce. “Only in bud; too young to afford grounds for a valid opinion.” —E. 8. MARSHALL.

Deschampsia flecuosa L., b. montana Hook. [Ref. No. 67]. Heath land amongst Calluna, Thompson, v.-c. 28, July 4, 1914.—F. Roginson. ‘No; only type. Var. montana is quite alpine.”—HE. S. MarsHatt. ‘“ A heath form. In the true montana the panicle is closed in fruit and the glumes are rich purple.”—G. C. Druce.

Arrhenatherum elatiuws M. and K., var. biaristatum Druce. Near Lydd, Kent, July 1914, and the first species to grow on the shingle beds —that is, it approaches more closely to the sea than any other plant. —G. C. Druce.

Keeleria gracilis Pers. [Ref. No. 77]. Newmarket Heath, v.-c. 29, June 8, 1913. Is this type? It seems to be intermediate between gracilis and britannica in some respects. —W. C. Barron. “ Material too meagre ; but I think it rightly named.”— E. 8. Mars#att.

Kelerva 2 [Ref. No. 112]. Sandy coast, Deal, East Kent, v.-c. 15, July 29, 1913.—W.C. Barron. ‘“ A small form of KX. albescens DC. ; new for Kent, I think.”—-E. 8. Marsuaui. “I wish the lower leaves on my specimen had been better shown. The plant suggests K. albescens DC. In that species the radical leaves and the leaves of the off-shoots are not flat as in gracilis, but enrolled-subulate. On the whole, I think it is very likely to be albescens; if so, a new county record.” —G. C. Drucer.

Keleria vallesiana Asch. and Graebn. Uphill and Brean Down, N. Somerset, July 8, 1913. This grass seems to have recovered ground ; there was a great quantity of it at Uphill, and a limited quantity on Brean Down, but only a smal! proportion was in flower.— H. J. RIDDELSDELL.

174 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

Poa bulbosa L. [|Ref. No. 36]. Loose sand by sea, South Denes, Yarmouth, v.-c. 27, May 9, 1914.—F. Rosinson.

Glyceria festuciformis Heyn., var. hibernica. Strangford Lough, Co. Down, August 1909. In considerable quantity. Not quite the continental species, differing in several points, especially in the less acuminate glumes.—G. C. DRucE.

Festuca rigida Kunth, forma or var.? [Ref. No. 120]. Quarry Wood, Berks, v.-c. 22, June 22, 1913. <A pretty form, growing on a bank under beech trees. Is it a usual shade form, or more than that ? —W.C. Barron. “Very curious; probably a starved state of dry woodlands.” —E. 8. MARSHALL.

Festuca dumetorum L., forma planifolia Hackel, on lat. comb. nov. [Ref. No. 4727.] Skegness, Lincoln, July 1911. Growing with the type. The occurrence of this flat-leaved form necessitates an alteration in description given in my edition of Hayward’s Pocket Book, in which the leaves (of the type dumetorum) are described as “ filiform”; it should read ‘ filiform or flat, acute.” Although there treated as a variety of F. rubra (for the sake of uniformity) dumetorum is a good species, and is so kept by Rouy /7. Fr. xiv., p- 202, who, however, puts under it as a race, /. arenaria Osb., which we place under /. rubra.—G. C. Druce. :

— Festuca ambigua Le Gall.? Blown sand, Pagham, W. Sussex, - v.-c. 13, June 15, 1914.—J. E. Lirrur. ‘“ Festuca Myuros L.”— J. Cryer. ‘Certainly ; just like the blown sand Deal to Sandwich plants.”,—E. S. Marswatt. “Ts F. ambigua Le Gall. the F. Danthonu A. & G., var. ambigua mihi, of my List. I found the type plentifully in Greece in 1914.”—G. C. Druce.

Festuca Myuros L. [Ref. No. 644.] Berechurch, N. Essex, v.-c. 19, May 31, 1914.—G. C. Brown. “Not F. Myuros L., but F. bromoides L. (F. sctwroides Roth).”—C. E. Brirron and E. S. MarsHaty. ‘Not Myuros, but FP. bromoides L., which is, oddly enough, only given sub-specific rank by Rouy. The fruits of the two plants are quite distinct.”—G. C. Druce.

Bromus maximus Desf. [Ref. No. 42.] Sandhills by sea, North Denes, Great Yarmouth, v.-c. 27, May 10, 1914.—F. Rosrtnson. “ Hackel, and Rouy (f7. Fr.) use the name B. villosus Forsk. for this, but B. rigens L. is older, but perhaps less well defined.” ——G. C. Drucz.

Bromus tectorum L. [Ref. No. 52.] Roadside, light soil, three miles out of Thetford on London Road, West Suffolk, June 4, 1914.— F. Ropinson. ‘ Yes.”—G. C. Druce.

REPORT FOR 1914. ou ay

Bromus erectus Huds., var. glabrifolius Borbas. Railway side, Seascale, v.-c. 70, June 5, 1914. I am not sure that the varietal name is correctly applied to these plants.—D. Lumps. ‘“ Yes.”—G. C. DRUCE.

Bromus unioloides H. B. K. Waste ground, Hythe Quay, Colchester, v.-c. 19, June 2, 1913.—G. C. Brown. “ Yes.”—G. C. DRvceE.

Bromus secalinus L., var. hirtus A. & G. Iver, Bucks, July 1903. ==. ©. DRUCE.

Bromus sp. Mud wall top, Wigginton village, Oxon, June 23, 1914. Closely related to B. racemosus, but the compact panicle apparently separates it from that species. —H. J. RippELSDELL. “ A curious, capitate form of Bb. hordeaceus L.; less hairy than the type, thus approaching var. leptostachys (glabratus).”—EK. 8. MarsHA.t. “ B. hordeaceus L., forma congestus.”—G. C. Druce.

Bromus arvensis L. In sainfoin, Purwell, Hitchin, Herts, v.-c. 20, July 16, 1914. In the early state the palea is about 5 mm. shorter than the flowering glume. Later, in fruit, it equals or slightly exceeds it.—J. E. Lirriz. Also [Ref. No. 89] from farm roadway, Holme Hall, v.-c. 28, August 27, 1914.—F. Ropinson. “Yes; Rouy puts it in the genus Serrafalcus, which also contains secalinus, commutatus, racemosus, hordeaceus (mollis) and my Bromus interruptus = Serra- falcus interruptus mihi = S. pseudo-velutinus Groves.”—G. C. DRucs.

Agropyron pungens R. & S. Shoreham, Sussex, June 1891.— G. C. Druce.

Agropyron pungens R. & 8., forma cristatum. Teste Hackel. [| Ref. No. 50]. Albecq and Vazon Bay, Guernsey, August 16,1912. This form occurs in some quantity on the shingle inside the sea wall between Albecq and Vazon Bay. The plants seem to bear the same relation to the type as Loliwm perenne, var. cristatum Doell, to type. Of this I sent some specimens last year, and have since noted some normal plants of Loliwm perenne developing this cristatum form of spike, apparently as a result of damage through being trodden upon. However, these Guernsey plants are not in any sense damaged, though they very probably are starved. The type was plentiful thirty yards further inland.—W. C. Barron. “Yes, Prof..Hackel so named similar specimens which I collected in the same locality in 1906.”— G. C. Druce.

Agropyron junceum x repens Beauv. Keyhaven, 8. Hants, v.-c. 11, August 1914.—J. Comper. ‘Not in the least like any of my

176 THE BOTANICAL EXCHANGE CLUB OF THE BRITISH ISLES.

specimens of this hybrid, mostly certified by Hackel. Why not A. pungens?”—E. 8. Marswatt. “I think only luxuriant pungens.”— G. C. Druce.

Hordeum violaceum Boissier. Selkirk, v.-c. 79, October 1913. Alien, Asia Minor. Det. A. Hackel. In this later gathering of 25th October, the beautiful blue shade is not so apparent as in my August. specimens, owing possibly to the want of sunshine.—I. M. Haywarp. “Yes, a beautiful grass, which, through Miss Hayward’s generosity, was figured in our last Report.”—G. C. DRUCE.

Athyrium Filiafemina Roth, var. incisum Newm. [Ref. No. 4804]. Four Slips Copse, Northants, August 1903.—G. C. Druce. ““ Yes.”_F. W. STANSFIELD.

Polystichum angulare Presl, ? var. Braunit Spenner. Hedgebank near Newquay, Cardiganshire, May 14, 1914.—J. W. Wuirz. ‘The more slender of these fronds is typical angulare. The denser one has some resemblance to Braunw, but in my opinion is a setose form of angulare going very slightly in the direction of aculeatum. The true Braun of the U.S. America is very easily distinguished in the young growing (spring) state by both surfaces as well as rachis being thickly clothed with fine linear scales which are shed when the frond reaches maturity. I shall be pleased to send Mr White a fresh frond of true Brauni later in the season if he cares for it. I am sceptical of Braun as a British fern. It seems to me to have affinities with P. setosum, although quite distinct from it.”—-F. W. SransFietp. “I have never seen this; but Mr White’s plant differs greatly from ordinary P. angulare, which abounds in my parish, and agrees fairly well with the descriptions of Koch and Rouy. Aspidiwm Brauni Spenner is retained as a full species by Nyman, under the earlier, but preoccupied name A. angulare Kit.; Rouy makes it a sub-species.”— EK. 8S. MARSHALL.

Dryopteris cristata A. Gray. Scoulton, Norfolk, August 1904.— G. C. Druce. ‘“Yes.”—F. W. STANSFIELD. .

Lastrea glandulosa Newm. Ankerbury Bog, v.-c. 34, June 2, 1913. Stipes usually thickly glandular; fronds glandular beneath but not very thickly. The scales are not as dark as those of dilatata; the fronds may be described as broadly lanceolate : at any rate they are not those of true dilatata. Ina very wet piece of wood below a bog on Ankerbury Hill, Lydbrook, W. Glos. Whether this is the place first made famous by Mr Purchas’s discoveries or not, I am uncertain ; the houses now come within a hundred yards of it, and the bog has shrunk. A number of circumstances make me doubt whether the name is correct ; and I have never seen an authenticated

REPORT FoR 1914. ie irs

specimen of Newman’s glandulosa.—H. J. RippELspELy.—“ L. glandulosa Newm. is described by Newman as having concolorous scales, while those of this specimen are maculated. Glandulosa and collina Newm. are both forms intermediate between dilatata (aristata) and spinulosa. There are many such intermediate forms, and they are by no means well defined. [ should call this specimen ZL. collina Newm., as having somewhat of the habit of spinulosa with the bicolorous scales of dilatata.”—F. W. STANSFIELD.

Dryopteris rigida Underw. Hutton Roof, Westmoreland, August 1909.—G. C. Druce. “TI agree. It was very abundant forty years ago in the station.” —F. W. STANSFIELD.

Hymenophyllum tunbridgense Sm. Rocky wood in W. Glos., June 1, 1914. Coll. H. H. Knicur. A few scraps just to establish the record. I believe I recorded it somewhere in 1911, when Mr Knight first showed me the plant. He tells me now that the fern is in fair quantity on rock faces, in very dark parts of the wood. Some of the sheets bear fruit.—H. J. RippEtspeLt. “ Yes.”—F. W. STANSFIELD.

Nitella opaca Agardh. Looe Pool, Cornwall, July 1904.—G. C. DRUCE.

Nitella hyalina Agardh. Carminow Creek, Looe Pool, Helston, W. Cornwall, August 28,1914. I think this is the right plant, though they are smaller than other specimens I have.—Coll. E. Tuursron ; comm. C. C. Viaurs.

Tolypella glomerata Leonh. Marcham, Berks, June 1891.—G. C. DRUCE.

CORRECTIONS IN DISTRIBUTOR’S REPORT FOR 1913.

Page 444. Ranunculus Flammula L. In second line, for “ Kir- bistry ” read “ Kirbister.”

Page 471. Hedera Helix L., var. borealis Druce. In fifth line omit “ Lieutenant,” and in sixth line, for “ Bethsdale” read ‘“ Berrie- dale.” !

; | , i ane i i +a m aS ‘ ny S Z a ‘ 4 i 4 . i! o i + zl | oO . 1 ‘ 1 . ’ } > A a :

= q —

* P

i v . - fi i \ P . A ‘ - ¢ .

Rk x Wiss Ps x! ty

LOT Oe SS iy, 0:

_ inninaa

01702 8739 POTAMOGETONS of the BRITISH ISLES:

Descriptions of all the Species, Varieties, and Hybrids, by ALFRED FRYER, A. H. EVANS, and ARTHUR BENNETT. The plates illustrate each variety, - with their different stages of growth, and enlarged flowers, fruit and sections.

Royal 4to, pp. xi. t. 94, 60 plates, cloth.

Bovene With Coloured Plates, - - = BS &S 5s net. ; With Uncoloured Plates, - - - - 43 15s net.

HANDBOOK of the BRITISH FLORA:

A description of the Flowering Plants and Ferns indigenous to, or naturalised in, the British Isles. Preceded by a short treatise on the Outlines of Botany as intro- ductory to Local Floras)s By GEORGE BENTHAM. Revised by Sir J. D. HOOKER. Crown $vo, pp. xxx, + 584. PRICE: Qs net.

FLORA OF HAMPSHIRE:

Including the ISLE OF WIGHT, with localities of the less common spécies. By F. TOWNSEND, M.A., F.L.S. Second Edition ; with Map. pp. xxxvill, + 658. 84 in. x 54 in. PRICE (reduced) : 12s net.

[LLUSTRATIONS of the y wSQ es, BRITISH FLORA; Wa Vet

A Series of Wood Engravings, with dissections, of ~ = i Wo -

British Plants, from Drawings by W. H. FITCH . XO Wa) a

and W. G. SMITH, forming an _ Illustrated se SENS A }

Companion to all British Floras. Crown 8vo. _ e Wwe

1315 Wood Engravings. PRICE: Qs net.

BOTANICAL NAMES for oor eae | ENGLISH READERS; “% ™ : By RANDAL H. ALCOCK. Contains a History

of Botany from the earliest traces down to the present day, and explains the derivation and meanings of substantive and adicntive

names in the British Flora. Demy 8vo, 236 pp. Price: 6s net. British Grasses, by M. PLUEs, Uses of British Plants, with 225 With 16 Plates and 100 Wood Engrav- Illustrations, by ProfessorG. HENSLOW.. ings. 307 pp. Crown 8vo. ° 124 pp. Crown 8vo.

PRICE: 7s 6d net. PRICE: 4s 6d net.

An Edition without Plates, 4s 6d net.

British Ferns, by M. PLurs. With British Seaweeds, by S. O. Grav.

16 Plates and 55 Wood Engravings. 16 Plates. 312 pp. Crown 8vo.

281 pp. Crown 8vo. Price: 7s 6d net. PRICE: 7s 6d net. An Edition with Geel a 5s

An Edition without Plates, 4s 6d net. net.

FULL CATALOGUE ON APPLICATION.

L. REEVE & CO., LTD., 6, Henrietta St., LONDON, W.C.