scent of the leaves is equally variable in both. There are, however, some peculiarities which, though not of much
importance, will help to distinguish it with tolerable certainty. Frequently it produces long, rambling, unarmed
shoots, which are rarely observed in Rosa rubiginosa. The styles are often without pubescence, and the calycine
leaflets usually drop off before the fruit is quite ripe.
The American Sweetbriar, Rosa suaveolens o f Pursh, is admitted by American botanists to be an imported species,
though now naturalized in many parts of the United States, and differs in no respect from our European
plant.
The variety y . Rosa umbellata is very common in gardens, with flowers in a semi-double state. I t is the Rosa
eglanteria cymosa of Woods. Lind.
For nearly the whole of the above synonyms and description I am indebted to Mr. Lindley, who has allowed
me to extract them from the unpublished sheets o f his Monograph of the genus Rosa. He has there enumerated
several other varieties of the present species (besides B. inodora, the subject of the following plate); but as these
have not been ascertained to be natives of Great Britain, I do not think i t necessary to mention them here. The
dissections of the fructification also are from his pencil.
This plant is extremely common throughout England, and the more so as it is much used for fences. I t flowers
in June and July.
ROSA RUBIGINOSA, var. inodora. SCENTLESS
BRIAR ROSE.
ROSA rubiginosa B. inodora; aculeis valde aduncis subasqualibus, foliolis minus glandulosis, foliolis
calycinis ante maturitatem deciduis. Lind.
ROSA rubiginosa B. inodora. Lindley Monog. o f Rosa, p. 88.
ROSA inodora. Agardh Novit. p . 9.
ROSA dumetorum. Smith Engl. B ot. t. 2579.
ROSA Borreri. Woods in Act. Linn. ml. 12. p. 210.
[For Generic and Specific Characters, see Rosa rubiginosa.]
Fig. 1. Leaf, magn. Fig. 2. Portion of a branch, with fruits, not. size.
This, which is the Rosa Borreri of Woods, appears to be the same as R . inodora of Agardh’s Novit ice ; and has
given me more trouble than the interminable varieties of Rosa canina. I t is a puzzle between' the latter • and
R . rubiginosa ; and is, I think, equally referable to either. In the neighbourhood of Halesworth it is not uncommon,
with smaller leaves than ordinary (and it is in this state that it is figured here), but with the edges unequivocally
tinged with red. Its mode of growth and its prickles resemble rubiginosa ; but its calycine leaflets are often
deciduous, and the leaves are frequently destitute o f glands. Sometimes serratures diverge, sometimes point towards
the end of the leaflet. Mr. Lyell has received R . Bort'eri from Mr. Borrer, growing by the side of R . mi-
crantha, and the difference is very trifling. Agardh’s Rosa inodora does not appear to differ from this in any respect,
unless it be in his calling the fruit of his purple. Lind.
This singular plant, which appears at first sight so different from Rosa rubiginosa, I have considered sufficiently
remarkable to deserve a separate plate here.
Both the drawing and description o f this, plant are from Mr. Lindley.
Its time o f flowering is the same as that of R . rubiginosa.