MITELLASTRA AND RUBACER. 233 
not be put into Bossekia but by altering the published diagnosis 
of the latter. Omit the word “European” and what is left is 
false. R. odoratus ‘‘at the time” was known to hundreds of 
botanists in Europe who had never seen Chamaemorus. 
9.“ Should not this [ R. Moluccanus], according to Dr. Greene’s 
own interpretation, be the type of Bossekia?” The questioner 
concedes that Necker in making group distinctions emphasized 
habit; also that R. odoratus is at least a part of Bossekia. I 
now answer this one question by eight questions, any one of which 
is a severe rebuke of my respected colleague’s utter recklessness 
in writing. (1.) Can Necker be believed to have referred to the 
same genus with JK odoratus, a blackberry pure and simple, 
weak, straggling and prickly? (2.) Before putting his question 
did our critic not ascertain that R. Mo/uccanus is a blackberry 
pure and simple, straggling and prickly-stemmed ? (3.) Has our 
long-time specialist in Rosaceae yet to learn of native American 
blackberries which, as seedling plants, and up to the year of 
their first flowering and fruiting, bear none but simple leaves, 
then in their fuller maturity only compound leaves? (4.) Does 
he need from me the information that one such American black- 
berry came to be published at first for two distinct species 
because of this twofold appearance? (5.) Has he looked into 
the history of R. Moluccanus far enough to see that the earlier 
author, from whom Linnaeus borrowed all his knowledge of it, 
published as his type of the species an Asian blackberry with 
leaves compound? (6.) If so, did Mr. Rydberg not go on and 
ascertain that the simple leayed one was made by Rumph no 
more than a variety of the other? (7.) Is not then the Linnaean 
Moluccanus, after all, to be viewed as a mere younger state of 
R. parvifolius? (8.) Will our friend of the Torreya disputation 
say that Necker in all probability knew not these freaks of 
blackberries ? 
This column of impeachments must end here for want of 
time and space. But nine specifications of truthlessness indi- 
cated from these pages of Torreya should suffice for the present 
