CCCII 
The following paper on the subject deserves the wider circulation which its reprint 
in Nature would give it. It represents the Harward tradition and practice, and is the. 
last scientific utterance of Dr. Sereno Watson, who so soon followed to grave his illustrous 
predecessor, Asa Gray 227). 
Oetober 1892. Conway Mae-Millan in The American Naturalist pag. 
858—860 (Aus ,The Metaspermae of the Minnesota Valley*, vorlàufige Mit- 
theilung) writes: 
Citations of Authors of Genera amd Species. ln order to obtain stability of nomen- 
clature it is necessary to provide that the name of a plant, the specifie name eannot be 
changed through caprice or whim. Nor can it be changed through ignorance, providing 
the mistake through which the name was made has been discovered. 'l'herefusal to correct 
mistakes and the disinclination to do thorough bibliographieal work before publishing a 
new specifie name is the cause of most confusion in botanical nomenclature. Hence has 
arisen the so-called internationel law or law of priority whieh provides that the earliest 
published specific name of any plant must stand, providing that the name is not antedated 
by some other similiar name applied to a plant belonging in the same genus. Many 
botanists do not admit the validity of this principle except in the case of species which 
they may have themselves named and published. "With refereuce to others they are 
accustomed to insist that ,,?ustoms" ,,long established habit", and a conservative condition 
must be maintained. "This is to save the difficulty of having to revise their own systems 
of nomenclature, and serves in many cases to cover inaecuracies or hastiness. With this 
conservative position, the unthinking and unbotanieal are always, distinctly satisfied and 
are accustomed to declare that botanical nomenclature is purely a ,,praetieal matter" and 
should be taken out of the hands of the botanists* altogether and turned over to some 
unprofessional commission for settlement.  Objections of this sort are natural, for the 
changing of names in our accustomed department of science is always a confusing matter. 
Sueh critieism is, however, unthinking and unbotanical because it fails to recognize that 
the whole diffieulty has originated on aecount of just such conditions, as are extolled and, 
recommended for perpetuation. "The only way to obtain a stable nomenclature is by ri- 
gidly enforeing the law of priority with reference to specific names. All instability finds 
its well spring in the disregard of this law, and stability under our present general system 
of nomenelature can only be obtained by strict adherence to the oldest available specific 
name, by whomever or wherever it may have been published. — 
The cause of the present npheavel in plant nomenclature, signalized but not at all 
initiated, by such a book as that of Kuntze is very easy to discover. Never so much as 
to-day has botany become world-wide. "The multiplicity of periodicals, the facilities for 
exchange and correspondence between different countries, expeditions, congresses, communi- 
eations, the development of new centers of activity in all parts of the globe, all conspire 
to make insularity of nomenclature impracticable, except for those who do not care to be. 
within the pale of modern conditions. It was a matter of less importance fifty years ago, 
if the name JPotamogeton paoweiflorus was given to one plant in France, by Lamarck, 
and to quite a different plant in America by Pursh. There was less danger of confusion, 
for Freneh botanists and American botanists were not then so distinetly interested in each 
other's field. The international character of science was recognized long ago in the adoption 
of an international language — Latin — in which oriental and occidental investigators 
can communicate, whatever their native dialect. 'The law of priority simply carries this 
recognition farther, and provides that in the departement of nomenclature Latin shall be 
used in the same sense in all countries. 
In America the rightful implication of the law of priority has been ably expounded 
by Britton and Greene, seconded by many others. Under their leadership most of the 
younger school of botanists have determined to enlist, but the older men whose life works 
have been largely accomplished under the older and insular interpretation, the provincial 
dispensation, as it may be named, have in most cases failed to withdraw from the position 
of their youth — the ,position of naming - plants - as - one - pleases" — and their 
publieations are in consequence marred by the ilegal nomenclature. Manuals and handy, 
reference floras, most local lists, and many monographs have perpetuated the faulty and 
insular methods, and it is but very recently that a concerted attempt: is being made fo 
establish this department of botanical work upon the only sure foundation possible 
without a complete withdrawal from the existent System. 
CENCHOMOIETTINONT 2 RES 
