CCCI 
seine bisherige Thütigkeit sich ein bedeutendes Verdienst erwarb, in nicht zu ferner Zeit 
zu Stande kommen; es wird von allen Botanikern, denen die müglichst rasche Durch- 
führung einer ebenso nothwendigen, wie wünschenswerthen Reform am Herzen odierna 
digst begrüsst werden. 
(Folgt nun ein Auszug aus Ascherson's Bericht, den wir schon wiedergaben.) 
November 1892. J. Freyn in Oesterreichische Botanische Zeitschrift im 
Berieht über den Congress zu Genua schreibt Seite 394: 
Angenommen wurde Artikel II einstimmig mit dem Zusatzantrage Prantl, wonach 
alle Gattungsnamen zu verwerfen sind, welche den Gesetzen der binüren Nomenclatur nicht 
entsprechen (z. B. Sirmüllera O. Kuntze(2264). 
17. November 1892. W. T. Thisleton Dyer in ,,Naturo* p. 53/4. 
Botanical Nomenclature. In Nature for October 6 (p. 549) there is a note ,0n the 
progress of the negotiations concerning the nomenclature of genera, started by a com- 
mittee of botanists at Berlin to supplement the decisions of the International Botanical 
Congress held at Paris in 1867". 1t is stated, that ,the botanical authorities of the 
British Museum favour the suggestions; those of Kew are against them.^ 
Now this requires a little correction. It may beremarked to begin with that many 
botanists are exercised at the present time not merely about the nomenclature of genera, 
but also about that of species. Kew has, howewer, never given its adhesion to the at- 
tempts that have been made to bring about an international agreement on these matters. 
It has always felt, that so many considerations must determine the course taken by the 
systematists in any particular case, that there is no advantage but positive inconvenience, 
in being subjected to a hard and fast rule. It is therefore with no disrepect to, or want 
of sympathy with the able shool of Berlin botanists, who have recently formulated some 
new proposals with regard to nomenclature, that Kew has officially refrained from ex- 
pressing any opinion upon those proposals. It has neither expressed approval nor dis- 
approval. 
In America Harvard has long occupied the leading place in the botanical world, 
and the principles adopted there have been substantially in accord with those adopted at 
Kew. Hitherto therefore the leading English-speaking botanists who have occupied them- 
selves with systematic botany have been in substantial agreement that the adoption of a 
Strict law of priority must give way to considerations of convenience. 
Well known and aecepted names are not therefore to be lightly changed at the 
result of mere bibliographical research. As to specific names the often merely mechanical 
process of describing a new species is held to be of little value compared with the more 
diffieult task of assigning to the plant described its true affinities and correct systematic 
position. The principle which guides Kew practice in this matter is laid down by Sir 
Joseph Hooker in the ^Flora of British India" (p. VII). 
He remarks: ^The number of species described by authors who cannot determine 
their affüinities increases annually, and I regard the naturalist who puts a described plant 
into its proper position in regard to its allies as rendering a greater service to science 
than its describer, when heeither puts it into a wrong place or throws it into any of those 
chaotic heaps miscalled genera with which systematie works still abound." 
———— —. 
?26*) Teh schob hier das ausgefallene Wort ,wie* ein und setzte für das 
Wort oder ein ;und*, Denn nur so entspricht es den Pariser Congressverhált- 
nissen von 1867, wo der Entwurf von DC. erst von einer Commission stark 
befeilt wurde und dann erst vor das Plenum kam. 
??64) Das ist ein Missverstündniss seitens Freyn; Prantl hat damit die 
Adanson'schen Namen ausschliessen wollen, weil angeblich Adanson keine binüre 
Nomenelatur gehabt habe; efr. Note Nr. 73. Auf andere Namen, auch auf 
Correctur missfülliger Namen bezieht sieh das nicht. 
Kuntze, Rev. gen. 
X 
