219 
of zodlogists, but such a radical change will not be easily ac- 
quiesced in. In the case of zodlogists, the family usually contain- 
ing only few genera, it is comparatively easy to adopt the name 
of one of them for that of the family, and, as a rule, the characters 
of the adopted genus will not as widely differ from those of the 
other genera as, say, Fragaria does from Prunus, Cassia from Tri- 
folium or Pinus from Ginkgo, so that such name is readily accept- 
able as representative of the family. It happens that the botanical 
families in question are among the largest of the vegetable world 
and it seems difficult to recognize CASSIACEAE as the representa- 
tive of all Lecuminosag, and AmMiaceae as that of all UmBe.ir- 
ERAE. The difficulty would be lessened if botanists, instead of 
extending the boundaries of families as has been the tendency in 
recent times, endeavored to restrict them to the lowest admissible 
limits, those, for instance, of several of our well defined suborders. 
I am not prepared to make a choice between the two alterna- 
tives. Perhaps a majority of botanists would now prefer that the 
old familiar names be maintained. Be that as it may, a decision 
Will soon impose itself and, judging from the present trend of 
thought, at least in this country, it is safe to predict that long and 
honorable usage will eventually be sacrificed to the claims of 
uniformity and stability. 
If we admit the law that the family name must in all cases be 
based upon that of a recognized genus, we still have difficulties to 
surmount; what is a “recognized” genus? The comparative 
instability of genera is well known; authors do not agree upon 
their value and limitations; should the family name be exposed 
to this insecurity? The danger of possible changes from that 
Source is very much mitigated by A. De Candolle’s law: 
“ An old genus name which has become the name of a section 
Or species can be maintained as the radical of a family name: 
LENTIBULARIACEAE from Lentidularia, HipPocASTANACEAE from 
Aesculus Hippocastanum, CARYOPHYLLACEAE from Dianthus Cary- 
ophyllus, etc.” 
If this law can be accepted by nomenclature reformers, their 
path will be made much smoother and we shall be the more readily 
inclined to follow them thereon. 
