8 Rhodora [JANUARY 
out question as the type of the Linnean Alsine, and since A. sege- 
talis belongs to the genus known variously as Spergularia Pers. (1805), 
Tissa Adans. (1763) or Buda Adans. (1763) it is obvious that Alsine 
is synonymous with them. By the International Rules Spergularia, 
being a nomen conservandum, is retained over all competitors, but by 
those who attended the International Congress at Vienna as regular 
Commissioners or as delegates but who have felt no obligation to 
accept the majority rulings of that representative convention! 
and by those who prefer the provincial American Code to an inter- 
national agreement, the name Alsine L. should be used for Tissa, 
Buda, or Spergularia. 
It is not clear upon what ground followers of the American Code 
apply the name Alsine to Stellaria L. The American Code is explicit 
as to the type of a Linnean genus, and by its ruling the type of Alsine 
is unquestionably A. segetalis. The portions of the American Code 
bearing upon this point are in Canon 15: 
“The nomenclatorial type of a genus or subgenus is the species 
originally named or designated by the author of the name. If no 
species was designated, the type is the first binomial species in order 
eligible under the following provisions: 
“(b) A figured species is to be selected rather than an unfigured 
species in the same work. In the absence of a figure, preference 
is to be given to the first species accompanied by the citation of a 
specimen in a regularly published series of exsiccatae. IN THE CASE 
OF GENERA ADOPTED FROM PREBINOMIAL AUTHORS (WITH OR WITH- 
OUT CHANGE OF NAME), A SPECIES FIGURED BY THE AUTHOR FROM 
WHOM THE GENUS IS ADOPTED SHOULD BE SELECTED. [Capitaliza- 
tion of the last sentence ours.] 
ExaAMPLES.— Lespedeza Michx. Fl. Bor. Am. 2: 70 (1803), is typified by 
L. procumbens Michx. loc. cit. pl. 89, the species first figured.” 
Now, referring to Alsine L., there were but’ two species: Ist, A. 
media, which is Stellaria media Vill. and 2d A. segetalis, which is 
1 Even the most painstaking students sometimes fail to view international agreements sub- 
jectively. Thus, Dr. Witmer Stone, writing in September, 1911, finds it ‘‘quite impossible 
to accept certain of the features of these codes [the International Rules and the American Code] ” 
— Plants So. N. J. 34 (1911); and, therefore, as a zoólogist making a temporary excursion into 
the bctanical field, adopts in his botanical writing methods which are quite at variance with 
those sanctioned by either the International Rules or the American Code. Nevertheless, 
when certain zoólogists proposed alteraticns cf their International Code of Nomenclature, 
Dr. Stone felt, in May, 1912, as most of us do, that, **if we are to shift back and forth to accom- 
modate the views of now one coterie of investigators, now another, we might as well abolish 
all codes and lapse into nomenclatural chaos" — Science, n. s, xxxv. 818 (1912). 
