226 
itis put forward under a name which is third in the order of priority. 
It might have been urged, at a time when such a plea would 
have been listened to, that Marshall’s name aguatica was a 
nomen falsum, the tree not being exactly aquatic. But the 
universally accepted Quercus aquatica is inappropriate in the same 
degree; and there are many other instances in which the same 
adjective is permitted to stand as the specific name of a plant 
which is not strictly aquatic, but an inhabitant of wet grounds or 
swampy places. A more probable reason of its failure to. obtain 
currency in the case of this honey locust is this, that Marshall’s 
Arbustum appeared as a small volume, something better it is true, 
than a nurseryman’s descriptive catalogue, and yet not defining 
thingsin precisely the Linnzean phraseology ; and the whole being 
published in the English language at a time when nothing botan- 
ical would be deemed worthy the notice of botanical authorities 
unless done in Latin. The book could hardly have been known to 
many Old World botanists, when only three years after-its pub- 
lication there came out in London, Walter’s Flora Caroliniana, in 
which the tree was described under the very appropriate name G. 
monosperma. However, Marshall’s right of authorship in this 
species is beyond question, and his name, G. aguatica, must surely 
supersede the one which has so almost invariably and for a whole 
century, usurped its place. 
AMARANTUS LEUCOCARPUS, S. Watson, Proc. Am. Acad. x., 
347, (1875). 
Amarantus leucospermus, S. Watson, op. cit. xxii. 446 (1887). 
In the place last cited the author of these names says: ‘‘ Op- 
portunity is here taken to correct the name which was at first 
carelessly given to the species.” But what is thus called a cor- 
rection plainly amounts to the creation of a new name by which 
to displace an old one. No one will seriously contend that /ew- 
cospermus is a mere corrected writing of /eucocarpus. It is anew 
name altogether; and this is even admitted by the author, who, 
having propounded it, immediately writes the earlier one after it 
as a synonym, an action which a merely grammatical correction 
does not call for. In constructing names, it is indeed well to 
keep in mind the difference between a carpos anda sperma, a 
fruit and seed, but if one fail in this and use the wrong term, the _ 
