3 



A competent and impartial judge, however, must acknowledge 

 that the bopk is beautifully printed and remarkably free from 

 typographical mistakes, and that it has cost a large amount of 



4 



steady labor and contains much that will be prized by advanced 

 students, but, on close examination, they will be forced to ask 

 questions like these : 



Why have the Co7itferce been retained in their old place ? 



Why has Prof Underwood's excellent elaboration of the 

 HepaticcB been appended, and the Miisci passed by ? 



r 



Why have older names of genera and species been restored 

 in some cases, and not in others ? 



Why have good published species and varieties, known to the 

 revisers, been excluded, and yet copious lists of real and sup- 

 posed hybrids given ? 



Why have species and varieties been admitted whose claims 

 are still doubtful ? 



Why have species seen by no American botanist, been in- 

 serted, solely on European authority and that not of the first 

 order ? 



Why have names, clearly proved untenable, not been dis- 

 carded — for example, Gentiana alba, Muhl., which is rightfully 

 G, flavida^ Gray ? 



It is a matter for regret that the new editors, with all the great 

 resources at their command, and the advantages of their position, 

 should have failed to come squarely up to the requirements of the 

 age and the present level of botanical science in our own country. 

 Had they done so, the book might have counted on the occupa- 

 tion of the field they profess to cover, for a generation to come, 

 without fear of rivalry. As it is, the contents are of unequal 

 value and not homogenous. They are marred here and there by 

 inexcusable faults of omission and faults of commission, and 

 betray the absence of one master-mind, which making *'use of 

 all known available information,'* would have shaped and 

 moulded the different elements so as to have produced a pro- 

 portionate and harmonious whole. 



Thos. C Porter. 



