RECENT LITERATURE. 
Gesamtbeschreibung der Kakteen (Monographia Cactacearum) 
von DR. CARL SCHUMANN, mit einer kurzen Anwetsung zur 
Pflege der Kakteen, von Kart. Hirscut, pps. 1-832, figs. 1-117. 
Neudamm, 1899. 
Since the appearance of the second edition of Forster’s Hand- 
book in 1886, no attempt until now has been made to: bring 
together all the described species of cacti. Forster admitted over 
nine hundred as valid species; Dr. Schumann enumerates less 
than seven hundred, including one hundred and eighty new or 
recent ones. He has, therefore, reduced by about one-half the 
species of the previous monograph. The work, though more 
scientific in form than Forster’s, appears to be intended primarily 
for the use of gardeners and amateur cultivators of Cacti. Indeed, 
the species are still too little known to admit of settled classifi- 
cation. 
The descriptions of species are unnecessarily long, the same 
phrases being repeated page after page, when by a judicious use 
of sections the book might be greatly reduced in size. A more 
serious matter is the alteration of the original diagnoses, in 
many cases quite obscured by broadening to include descriptions 
of other forms, which may or may not be related, or as ina 
number of cases the original character is set aside and the 
description entirely re-written from living plants, the identifica- 
tion of which is not entirely free from doubt. In consequence 
the original sources must be consulted, and the botanical interest 
of the work consists chiefly in the new species and the grouping. 
The sequence of the genera in Forster is, perhaps, to be pre- 
ferred. The separation of the Rhipsalide from Cereus and 
‘Phyllanthus by the interposition of Echinocactus, Mamillaria, 
etc., is quite unnatural. The species of Epiphyllum are distributed 
to Cereus (£. obtusangulum Lindb.) and to Phyllocactus (£4. 
Russellianum Hook. and #. Gartneri Sch.) leaving -. truncatum 
Haw. alone to represent the genus which is kept up solely on 
such a trivial character as the obliquity of the flower. It would 
seem much better to group together the species by their common 
