Thanks for letter and packet. Observations on Winch's specimens: leaving the roses until he comes to that section of "[English] Flora", but having briefly examined them concurs with Winch's opinions and compliments him as "a faithful & original observer"; believes the genus ['Rosa'] is a perfect example of the saying "the more cooks, the worse broth"; has no true authority for 'Rosa villosa' being wild in Britain.
Has not yet read [William Jackson] Hooker's work on roses, but thinks Hooker was "too hasty" with 'Salix' and showed he had not studied them properly, which he has told him, will avoid doing so in public. Criticises various recent publications on 'Salix' including by De Candolle and Sprengel, in which his own work on willows has been "jumbled", and Seringue, leading to nurserymen applying his names to common varities, leading him to be "plagued with enquiries".
Observations on Winch's remaining specimens: Winch's 'Salix forsteriana' and 'S. andersoniana' correct; the 'Salix' of fifth and sixth editions of [William] Withering's ["Botanical arrangement"] is 'S. myrsinites'; 'Cypripedium calceolus'; 'Saxifraga hirculus'; Winch's 'Epilobium alpestre' his 'E. alsinifolium'; 'Thlaspi hirtum'; Winch's new 'Veronica' is his 'V. saxatilis'.
Thanks for Winch's last work, has sent a copy to [Robert] Brown. Apologises for not being "a good correspondent", he has too much other writing; deeply engaged with "Flora Graeca", and following a trip to Holkham [Hall, Norfolk, home of Thomas William Coke] intends to focus on "English Flora", which he longs for "more than a schoolboy for his holidays".
[On recto of second folio] Two lists of plants sent to Smith, dated 12 March 1823, and 26 April 1824 "with desiderata" [in Winch's hand, see RelatedMaterial below].