124 
The Classification of the Archegoniates. 
By Lucien M. UNDERWOOD. 
There has hitherto been much looseness in the codrdina- 
tion of the groups of plants above what have been regarded the 
natural orders and at the same time wide difference in usage in 
group names. It is equally apparent that in some respects 
the botanists have followed a different system of nomenclature 
from the zodlogists, and they have not even followed a uni- 
form or consistent system among themselves. While it is 
not possible to crowd a series of forms within the limits of a rigid 
classification, or accurately coordinate all natural groups of plants 
in equally related categories, it certainly is possible to follow cer- 
tain broad principles and maintain a uniformity of nomenclature 
for the higher groups as well as for genera and species. Leaving 
particulars for further discussion there ought to be no difficulty in 
securing the adoption of the following system of group names and 
sequences : = 
SuB-KINGDOM. 
Crass. 
ORDER. 
FAMILy. 
GENUS. 
SPECIES. 
This is in skeleton the exact usage of the zodlogists and con- 
forms more nearly with the greater portion of the more recent 
usage among those whose work is connected with cryptogamic “ee 
botany. The differences that have been most prominent have 
arisen among the phanerogamic botanists, and some of the differ- 
ences have even become almost hoary-headed from long usage- 
Indeed incipient baldness marks not a few of them, and perhaps 4 
proper ventilation of some of the remainder will cause this to be- 
come even more apparent. 
1. In place of the term sud-fingdom, so generally used by 
zoologists, the term series has been used. The use of the former 
