374 USE OF LINNEAN SPECIFIC NAMES. 
edition of ‘Species Plantarum’ the leaves are described as 
“ Janceolatis.” Professor Haussknecht, the monographer of the 
genus, has rejected the name in favour of the comparatively 
recent Epilobium adnatum, Grisebach, and his example is followed 
by some botanists in this country. We think, however, inasmuch 
as the original description clearly indicates the one plant, the 
contrary evidence of the plate, the specimens in the herbarium, 
and Linneus’s subsequent amendment of the description, should 
not weigh against it. If, however, these three points were taken 
into account, and the species construed as including E. adnatum, 
E. obscurum, and E. roseum, according to the view advocated, by 
the process of exclusion, the first-named would still bear the 
name of E. tetragonum. 
4. EprLopium aLpinum. The description in ‘Species Plan- 
tarum, 17538, p. 348, reads Epilobium foliis oppositis ovato- 
lanceolatis integerrimis siliquis sessilibus caule repente. The 
habitat given is “ Alpibus Helveticis, Lapponicis.” The character 
of the fruit being sessile is evidently an error. The specimen 
in Linneus’s herbarium is E. lactiflorum, Haussk., an Arctic 
species, The name has been pretty generally, and rightly as we 
think, applied to the most distinct and widely distributed alpine 
species, which answers fairly well, and better than any other, to 
the description, but Haussknecht and others have rejected it in 
favour of E. anagallidifolium, Lamarck. 
Our conclusions are that it is desirable, in dealing with 
Linnean specific names, in all doubtful cases to disregard speci- 
mens altogether, and also to disregard any modifications made 
in his subsequent publications, and, as far as possible, to rely on 
the original descriptions, in conjunction with the references to 
earlier authors—construing the species liberally. 
Then, as regards Group 2,—to retain the name for the type 
if such is specified, or, if none, for the species which may be most 
fairly regarded as the type; and in the absence of such a species, 
for the residuary species after others have been cut off. 
As regards Group 3,—unless the evidence is hopelessly vague 
or contradictory, to retain the name for the species for which 
the weight of evidence points to its having been intended. 
