233 



exactly that form of the law of priority which the writer believes 

 to be the soundest, the broadest in its scope, and the simplest 

 and surest in its application. Nevertheless it is at variance in 

 some points with the views of at least one of the ablest advo- 

 cates of the movement. Obviously the friends of the revised 

 nomenclature must agree upon a statement of their dogma before 

 they propose it to the general congregation of American botan- 

 ists. What is desired, therefore, at this time is that those who 

 are satisfied with the agreement as here set forth should informally 

 signify their approval of it, and that any one who wishes modifi- 

 cations should present a revised version embodying the changes 

 believed to be advantageous.* 



Something may properly be said here in explanation and 

 support of the form of agreement herewith submitted. It is 

 purposely phrased so as to leave the subscribers free to use for a 

 while yet the current familiar nomenclature In correspondence 

 and in published writings of a merely popular character, inasmuch 

 as amateurs and the general public, in the present state of the 

 case, might be more perplexed than instructed by the new names. 

 But the obligation is binding to use them not only in one's own 

 herbarium but also in all '^published botanical writings," that is, 

 scientific papers, catalogues, textbooks and the like. The clause 



4< 



according to our best knowledge '' limits the obligation to such 

 revised names as are now conveniently accessible, or may from 

 time to time become so, in pubhshed works of presumably good 

 authority. 



The formal statement of the law itself is purposely framed to 

 uphold rigorously the first trivial (/. e, individual) name of the 

 plant, wholly irrespective of its higher or lower rank as species or 

 variety. In other words, accepting this definition, an original 

 variety raised to a species retains its original name : an original 

 species reduced to a variety does the same. Whether the vege- 

 table individuality in question is originally reckoned a species or 

 a variety is largely a matter of chance, and is wholly unimportant 

 ^ far as nomenclature is concerned. 7/ is the ORIGINAL NAME 

 that must ride. Moreover, it is downright injustice to deny the 



"* Communications upon this subject should be addressed to the editor of the 



Bulletin. 



