70 Recent Literature. [ZOE 
are launched by the author; but his wholesale transference of the 
species of a thousand genera, many of them of great extent, can only 
be considered an instance of colossal vanity, which will go far to con- 
vince botanists of the value of the zoological rule. It is impossible 
to assign any other reason than the gratification of personal vanity 
to the author’s addition of “OK.” to all the species of such genera 
as Astragalus, Selaginella, Lepiota, Corticium, etc., the value of 
which species he could not possibly know. It is an amusing cir- 
cumstance that in America the abbreviation with which his pages 
is so plentifully besprinkled is a slang expression in common use, 
said to have had its origin in indorsements on papers submitted 
to an eminent politician, who was as lawless in orthography as 
our author has proved himself in botany. When questioned as to 
its meaning, he explained that it meant “Oll Korect.”’ 
It is to be hoped that in giving new names to his genera he did 
not act from a malicious desire to render the recipients of his 
favor ridiculous. Such names as “ Bakeropteris,” ‘ Bisboeckelera,” 
“ Biscogniauxia,’’ ‘‘ Brittonamra,’’ “ Cookeina.”’ ‘' Durandeeldea,’’ 
‘‘ Greeneina,” ‘‘ Henribaillonia,”’ ‘‘ Jacksonago,’’ “ Jamesbrittenia,”’ 
‘“‘ Peckifungus,’’ ‘‘ Radlkoferotoma,’’ ‘‘ Sirhookera,’’ ‘‘ Sirmuel- 
lera,” ‘‘ Smithiantha,” may look well to his eyes and sound agree- 
ably in his ears, but his taste is likely to be unique. 
Among the numerous changes which, if adopted, would affect our 
Californian plants, may be mentioned Buda, which the author adopts 
instead of Tissa, because the latter remained longer a ‘‘nomen nu- 
dum;” but with a degree of inconsistency for which one would have 
hardly looked, he shortly after adopts Meadia instead of Dodeca- 
theon, transferring all the “species” (of whose value he is necessa- 
rily absolutely ignorant) to a genus which remained “naked”’ till 
his day—that he might attach “OK.” to the species. 
Agoseris, which he accepts in place of Troximon, is in similar case 
according to Mr. Greene the devoted disciple of Rafi nesque,forallthe — 
species are claimed by Mr. Greene in “ Pittonia,” which of course 
he could not do if there were a type species. Dr. Kuntze neverthe- 
less, having apparently kept the scope and intention of his work 
entirely secret, renames the species under the same date as Mr. 
Greene, but of course attaches ‘OK.’ to all of them. A similar 
muddle results from the equally inexcusable renaming of Legumin- 
ous species by Dr, Taubert in Bot. Centralblatt, September, 1881. 
