VOL. III. ] feecent Literature. 269 
the first three illustrated by excellent plates which I am glad to see 
are not folders, are described as new. The second paper—Plants 
Collected by the U.S.S. Albatross, 1887-91, along the Western Coast 
of America—is by various authors. J. N. Rose: Plants from Cocos 
and Galapagos Islands; D. C. Eaton: Ferns and Mosses from South- 
ern Patagonia and Fuegia, with description of one new species 
Bryum celophyllum; A. W. Evans: List of Liverworts from South- 
ern Patagonia, with descriptions of two new species, Lophocolea 
apiculata (pl. xv) and Schistochila quadrifida (pl. xvi); and a short 
list of Lichens from the same place by Dr. J. W. Eckfeldt. The 
third paper is a revision of the North American species of Hoffman- 
seggia by E. M. Fisher, and though marred somewhat by careless 
proof-reading is a valuable contribution. The study includes 17 
species, two of them, A. Zexensis and H. canescens, described as 
new and g new varieties are also characterized. One species, 7. 
intricata, has suffered change of name, the older var. glabra being 
substituted for it, it seems to me, without due consideration. The 
writer fully agrees with the proposition that varietal names should 
be retained when a named variety is raised to specific rank—with one 
important reservation—that in no case is a specific name to be dis- 
turbed. For a varietal name can only claim priority as a variety, 
its specific date being that on which it was described as a species, 
any other course would involve the nomenclature in a series of false 
assumptions and absurdities. The author, for instance, finds him- 
self unable to attach Watson’s name to a species which he never 
named, yet inferentially appends his own, which can only date from 
the publication of his paper.. Asa matter of fact the name glaéra 
was passed over for what appeared to be two good reasons. In the 
first place it is a pure and simple ‘‘ nomen nudum,” and if it were 
_ specific instead of varietal could only hold by the courtesy of a sub- 
sequent describer. In the second ‘place Hoffmanseggia belongs to 
the category of unstable genera, being regarded as too near Ceesal- 
pinia by Bentham, and unhesitatingly reduced to that genus by 
Baillon, and there is at least one older valid species of Czesalpinia 
bearing the specific name g/aéra. : 
Another instance where the author’s nomenclature seems to be at 
fault, according to his own rule, is in using demissa as a varietal 
name under H. falcaria, though by the synonymy given under it 
H. densiflora is the prior name. | : 
