Recommendations Regarding the Nomenelature 
of Systematie Botany. 
We, the undersigned, feel constrained to protest against the recent 
attempts made in the United States to change botanical nomenclature on 
theoretical grounds. In our opinion most of the suggested changes, even if 
they were generally adopted, could lead only to great confusion. An ex- 
planatory statement of the reasons, which compel us to take this action, is 
herewith briefly given. 
So far as the nomenclature of systematic botany is effective, it has been 
and should be developed only in intimate relation to scientific investiga- 
tion, and must be subject to constant modification with varying ideas of 
plant-affinities. Although attempts may be made to control its growth, its 
real development, especially as to generic names, is largely determined by 
usage. By judicious recommendations greater and greater uniformity in 
the application of botanical names may doubtless be obtained, but to make 
rules!) at serious variance with the customs of the past and to give them 
retroactive effect can only tend to complicate botanical language. For even 
if we depart from the nomenclature of former writers we can by no means 
avoid the constant necessity of using their works. Guided as to nomen- 
clature by general custom writers of the last hundred and fifty years have 
accumulated the vast quantity of facts and produced the voluminous litera- 
ture of our science. While its nomenclature is by no means uniform, it is 
with unimportant exceptions readily intelligible to working botanists. To 
reform this nomenclature upon theoretical grounds will not alter the im- 
portance of works of the past, which are likely always to remain the historic 
basis of classification. Thus the result of any serious change would be the 
necessity of acquiring two sets of names instead of one. Realizing keenly 
how serious would be the burden thus imposed not only upon systematists 
but upon all who are interested in any branch of botanical research as well 
as in the more practical aspects of the science such as pharmacy and horti- 
culture, the undersigned urge postponement of any radical measures of 
reform. 
1) For example, the recently proposed principle of »once a synonym always a 
synonym«, and the still more arbitrary ruling that a variety and species may not hold 
the same name under one genus, 
