* 
S 
EN UO ud 
227 27 42; 
Ld 
L2 
3 
CXCIII 
obvious. Indeed the appearance of this book | he has not said; and there is no plea that 
will I believe, tend to bring the method of | ean excuse it. De Candolle in 1824 proposed 
the American ornithologists and other zoo- | no genus Sphaeroma, nor had he any such 
logists into inereasing favor, and eause many | intention, and there is not the shadow of war- 
to write Castalia odorata, (L., which method |.rant or any one's saying that he did. "The 
Dr. Kuntze stigmatizes as false and often | first man to call this group a genus appears 
used by modesty or by negligence or by fear | to have been St. Hilaire; and he who gives 
of responsibility." — However, if this is not | his genus to another is chargeable with double 
employed, and there is a general acceptance | injustice. He injures both De Candolle and 
of the generie names pointed out by the author | St. Hilaire. He deprives both of them of certain 
as having priority, it will necessitate writing | rights, the latter of his genus and its name, the 
Kuntze (contraeted to OK. by Dr. Kuntze) | former of his right to call them, what he did call 
after surely not less than 25,000 specifie na- | them, only so many species of Malva, I know it 
mes, a positively fearful thing for Americans | is assumed that this compelling a man to say 
to contemplate. *a& genus" where he did not think there was 
While we consider that Dr. Kuntze has gone | more than a section is presumed to be a re- 
too far in beginning his nomenclature with | warding of his modesty. But it may be with 
the Linnaean Systema of 1735, we do not think | modesty, as with other virtues, that it is its 
that he has gone quite far enough in other | own reward. However that nay be, the prin- 
directions. He has not accepted the impor- | ciple of representing an author as saying what 
tant principle that a name once used for an | he never did say is one of the most odious 
organism ought to be applieable to thatand to | of literary vices. The plea of convenience 
no other, the doctrine of ^onee a synonym | is not often appealed to by me— the funda- 
always a synonym 29)" which would effeetually | mental principles of justice and right always 
prevent the instability of nomenclature due | in the long run making for convenience in 
to homonyms; he has not accepted specific every way most thoroughly — but this work 
names identieal with generie30) making here | of deposing valid generie names in favor of 
an exception to his otherwise stringent rules of | the spurious priority of sectional ones, will ereate 
priority, and while he accept the idea of prio- | another upheaval in nomenclature scarcely se- 
rity of plaee being as important as priority | cond to this whieh Dr. Kuntze's principles 
of time, it is only with important modifica- | have brought to pass; and we sincerely hope 
tions, which do not appear to me to have any | that Dr. Britton may reconsider this momen- 
sound basis. The only rule that can be effec- | tous question. 
tive in this matter must be one without ex- 
ceptions, if we are to arrive at fixed results. ENGA 
Dr. Kuntze's ehapter. on the dates of pu- 
blieation of the writings of the older authors is worthy of the closest attention. It supplies 
information which only a favored few have at their command, and for whieh he will have 
the lasting gratitude of botanists generally for years to come, 
The principal changes suggested for the generic names of North American plants are 
appended. I have annotated a few of them. It should be stated that in all eases which I 
have had time to examine I find his dates and facts entirely correct. (Now Dr. Britton gives 
on pages 53 —65 a list of all North-american genera-names, which I changed, except those of cellular 
eryptogams. In consequence of his starting-point of 1737 he rejects 44 names from the 249 
names, and according to the not yet legalized principle *once a synonym always a synonym" 
9 names are changed 31)). He writes: Coulterina Kuntze — Physaria Nutt. 1838 not Physa- 
riwm Pers. 1795, the latter a genus of fungi. The name is in honor of President John 
M. Coulter. As Mr. Rose has already dedicated to him a genus Coulterella (Contr. U. S. Nat. 
Herb. No. III 71, 1890) in Compositae, it is unlikely that the one here proposed will be main- 
tained. If two names of different gender, such as Physaria and. Physarium, cannot stand, it 
seems logical that 2 genera should not stand for the same person 32), 
??) That new principle would alter many hundreds of well known genera 
names; if accepted by a competent congress it could only be applied to 
future names. Rights acquired by authors under laws shall and ean not be 
altered without permission of such authors still alive. 
39) See $ 60 sub 2 of Paris Code which I could and would not change. 
?1) "There are yet interesting notes on genera-names but it is not here the 
place to discuss them, as I intented to diseuss here only on principles 
of nomenclature, 
* : i; 
?*) There is a. great difference between finals 8$: Q, $0, WS, (us, wm, dum 
etc. and suffies as: ella, ima, «rid, aster, opsis and about 15 more of 
QuEuS RUEE HUS fMi ret S z: SEINS 
