MENU 
CXCII 
The chapters of this book treat of J I. Àn 
Itinerary of his travels; Il. A eritieism of 
Durand's *Index Generum Plantarum di HI. An 
account of the errors in that work ; IV. Pfeif- 
fer's *Nomenclator Botanieus,^ V. Linnaeus 
relations with his eontemporaries; VI. The chan- 
ges of names made by Linnaeus and his eon- 
temporaries ; VII. Instability of Nomenclature 
from the time of Linnaeus to the end of the 
eighteenth century; VIII. Considerations on 
the founding of generie names; IX. Changes 
of names by the elevation of sections to ge- 
nera and for linguistie reasons; X. Homo- 
nyms, a cause of the ehanging of names and 
a lasting source of instability in nomenclature; 
XI. The simultaneous appearance of publi- 
cations and the incompleteness of libraries ; 
XII. Bentham and Hooker's *Genera Plan- 
tarum"; XIII. Convenienee as a hindrance to 
the aeceeptance of correct names; XIV. Lin- 
naeus ^Systema Naturae" Edition L, as the 
beginning of generic nomenclature; XV. Sug- 
gested modifieations of the international laws 
of nomenclature of 1867; XVI. Pritzel's 
*"Thesaurus Literaturae Botanicae ;? XVII. Mo- 
dern English nomenclature: (this chapter writ- 
ten in English, and especially interesting to 
English botanists). Then follows a iist of the 
plants eolleeted by the author, with all gene- 
rie priorities in the entire vegetable kingdom 
which he has ascertained, this occupying the 
greater part of the book. 
We have neither leisure nor space to satis- 
faetorily present the arguments advanced and 
the general results arrived at in this great 
work. It must be in thehands of every 
working botanist, whether he agree 
with the author wholly or in part. 
The changes in names which he proposes are 
for the most part based on perfectly sound 
principles, and will, no doubt, be widely ac- 
cepted. We think it a great mistake to go 
back to the first edition of Linnaeus Systema 
for generie names, and believe that the first 
edition of his *Genera Plantarum" of 1737 
to be the most satisfactory point of departure 
It is to be noted that Dr. Kuntze has io 
sympathy with citing authors older than the 
Linnaean time, remarking that a fixed basis 
is essential for the beginning of nomenclature 
which is just the position I have repeatedly 
taken. I consider the argument for the *& : 
stema" " Fes as not convincing, while tle 
reasons ior the ** U : 
satisfactory. xdaecpt e ri n 
sé à € erg of species and their authors 
üre:'y new method to propose 
He would write, for example, Castalia odo- 
raía Greene (L.) that is, to cite the orgi al 
author of the specifie name behind the i rem 
of the binomial. Just what is to b api 
bv thi e gained 
y this method over the one so widely in 
vogue of reversing this arrangement and 
writing Castalia odorata (L.) Greene, is not 
taken — the placing of it between the eom 
bination and the name of the author of the 
combination violates the Code. , 
In remarking upon the generie name Dursq, 
as antedating Capsella, Dr. Britton savg that 
the binary name for the common Shepherd's 
Purse becomes Juwrsa pastoris; to which I 
assent; but I would ask how, upon his own 
prineiples, that can be, since he insists that 
every name used as a specific by Linnaeus 
must be preserved in its integrity, even in 
the extreme case where the specifie becomes 
a duplieate of the generie name. By the code 
of the ornithologists to which he has announ- 
ced his full submission, the name of this 
weed must be Bursa Bursa pastoris. 
Citing Dr. Kuntze's return to the primi- 
tive applieations of Erysimum, Nasturtiun 
and other names of: eruciferous genera, his 
comments run thus: *The unnecessary mischief 
of going back to the Systema Plantarum of 
1735 is well illustrated by these four citations, 
It overturns several hundred specifie names 
in very closely related genera, apnd, as far as 
I ean see, has absolutely nothing to be said 
iu its favor". Well; the deed which had ab- 
solutely nothing to be said in its favor was 
that of Linnaeus, when in 1737 he transposed 
all these four names, attaching each one to a 
genus which almost from time immemorial 
had been known by one of the other names. 
It was this wilful, presumptuos and wholly 
inexeusable transposing of names which made 
the better class of Linnaeus! contemporaries 
in 1737 look on him with distrust. It was 
he who did the mischief; and Dr. Kuntze, 
by going back to 1735 — the time when Lin- 
naeus himself had not ventured to remove 
the ancient landmarks nor dispossess these 
four genera of their right names by wanton 
transpositions — has simply been true to prio- 
rity. "This must be admitted as in favor of 
what he has done; while if his 1735. start- 
ing-point be the legal one, he has obeyed the law. 
Mr. Jackson has well denounced as a 
"spurious priority" that with which Dr. Kuntze 
sometimes affects to invest subgenerie names 
by placing them on a level with the generie ?), 
degrading to the rank of synonyms the oldest 
generie names when they happen to be more 
recent than the sectional ones; and Dr. Brit- 
ton, to my dismay, under SpAaeroma versus 
Sphaeraleea, accedes to the proposition that 
this is wisely done, It is one of the grossest 
violations of the fundamental principle that 
an author must never make another say what 
*| That agrees with 8 58 of the Laws 
of Nomenclature. I can notagree with Prof. 
Greene on this point; see Rev. gen. pl. p. 
218. Norwantshetofearanother uphea vel 
by $ 58, for I have already worked up 
all such names as I met with. 
"SOSA Cp WEM OCTO CCU— o w4A& CU YXAS Cue C X—— o-— — o-—— 
I-E WW. uu 38 IEUN 
— MÀ NEC 
