XA À et IA 
NWNMT T 
CCI 
words, when they differ in one unlike consonant standing between two vowels or lacking 
in one of the words." He then proposes an addition to the effect that vernaeular names and 
the younger of two pseudohomonyms (e. g. .4piwm L, and .Apiíos Moench, within his 
rule) he adopted and latinized or altered, as the case may. be, by the addition of two or 
three letters; e. g. Vochy Aubl. he makes '*Vochysia" Aubl. corr. Juss.) .Apios, * Apiosus 
Haller corr. OK." He lays down some exceptions and additions, which are quite strictly 
formulated, and finally proposes: *Permissible name corrections do not warrant the citation 
of the correcting author in the first place, either for genera or for the names of species 
to be joined tberewith." He also lays it down that names like Heurckia and Vanheurckia, 
Candollea and Decandollea must stand as distinct. J believe J am justified in saying, ho- 
wever, that Saecardia (or as he writes it Saccardoa) and Pasaccardoa or Marckia and La- 
marckia (both of which stand under his rnle.) are much more likely to be confused in 
practice than .4píos and Apiwm; certainly more so than Capnodes and Capnodiwm, which 
conflict under his rule, so that he rejects the latter. Besides his corrections *(as Apiosus) 
are fatal to" the meaning of a name, and as a rule add nothing to its sound. It is all very 
well to have strict rules here as elsewhere, but there is room in this place for the appli- 
" eations of a little common sense. 
A suggestion which he makes for a new article is interesting, and will not seem 
unreasonable to those who have tried to deal with works in Polish or Hungarian which 
sometimes appear. It *is Article 69. Publications are only admissible for competition for 
valid nomenclature so long and so far as they are printed in Latin characters and appear 
in the Latin, English, French or German languages; but for gothic characters this has no 
retrospective force". To be strictly just this should include Italian 38), in other respects 
the rule is desirable. 
Section 15, additions, etc., to Pritzel's Thesaurus and 8 16, a vigorous and well 
written article in English on "Modern English Nomenclature" close the introduction. 
The revision itself follows, the genera in each family being taken up alphabetically. — 
Details of all kinds abound in notes, etc. and are often very interesting (e. g., on proper 
spelling, on botanical Latin etc.) But no confusion is produced by them or the revisions 
of genus-limits and monograph seattered through the work. One thing might be mentioned. 
He unites Aster and Solidago and intermediate groups in the genus .Aster, giving quite a 
full discussion of his reasons. — He also work out the proper species-name combinations 
whenever he changes a genus-name. Many things might be commented upon, did space 
permit, but the introduction indicates the nature of all the changes. 
Just what the effect of the work will be cannot be foretold. Many of the sugge- 
stions will hardly be adopted. Others, is to be hoped, will be. As the most thorough 
piece of work yet done in a direction now receiving much attention it 
must have some influence. Certainly the admirable discussion in the introduction of 
the defects of our present nomenclature and the causes of them cannot fail to have con- 
siderable effect, and constitutes the most valuable part of the work. "The author appears 
in the introduction as a keen and severe, yet on occasion appreciative critic, and if we 
are to believe his statement that he worked from thirteen to fourteen hours a day for the 
last three years, no one can charge him with haste or say as he does of Durand, that he 
has not put time enough upon his work. 
One acquires à good deal of prejudice against the book on first glancing it over, 
which disappears on a more thorough reading of the introduction. Paradox as it is, the 
only way to attain an unchangable and uniform nomenclature is to make changes now 
with an iron hand. *Unambiguous rules and priority," as he ever says, are the only sound 
principles by which we can bring order in [to] nomenclature. The changes necessitated 
by priority should . . . . be made as promptly and as thoroughly as possible, and — as 
we may wish it — if possible at once, in one book. 
1. Márz 1892. (Georges Poirault in Louis Morot's Journal de botani- 
que, supplément pag. XVII/XX: 
Otto Kuntze. .Revisio Generum Plantarum . . . l'auteur, qui a fait un voyage 
de deux ans autour du monde, a recueilli d'importantes collections botaniques comprenant 
?5) If Mr. Pound will propose to the next competent congress this lan- 
guage to be included in $ 69, I should not oppose, but I fear that most 
botanists would not agree therewith. 
