“Ol 
that while in both reports the botanical appendix occupied pages 
135 to 159, the same matter does not always occur. on identical 
pages. 
The Senate document was transmitted by the Secretary of — 
War, December 15, 1847; the House document F ebruary 9, 1848, 
but in examining the two editions to ascertain which was issued 
the earlier, it is evident, from the correction of the name Baileya 
multifiora on plate vi. to Baileya multiradiata to correspond with 
the text, and from the reference, on Abert and Peck’s map of New 
Mexico, to “the unpublished map of Lieut. Emory,” as well as 
the nature of other changes in the body of the report, and the fact 
that the House and Senate papers were issued in different series, 
that Document 41 was the one first published. 
In the body of the report the differences are almost exclusively 
botanical, consisting chiefly of the omission in Document 7 of 
many popular and scientific rfames of plants in sentences describ- 
ing the vegetation. To the differences in the two documents 
noted by Mr. Barnhart it may be added that in Document 41 typo- 
graphical errors in plant names are more frequent; that the cap- 
Sule and seed of /pomoea leptophylla are omitted from plate xi., and 
that the matter relative to Cereus giganteus was wholly revised in 
the other edition. Mr. Barnhart’s statement that certain pages of 
Document 41 bear the mark [7] in the upper outside corner ap- 
plies only to a part of the edition. This error was evidently either 
made or discovered and corrected during the printing of the edi- 
tion. But perhaps the most important difference in the two docu- 
ments is that No. 41 does not contain the general map of Major 
Emory’s route from Fort Leavenworth to San Diego. It does, how- 
ever, contain Abert and Peck’s map of New Mexico and another 
map showing the distinctive route of Lieutenant Colonel Cooke, 
both of which were incorporated in Major Emory’s large map 
published in Document 7. Both documents were printed by 
Wendell & Van Benthuysen, Washington. 
first edition of the Emory report is the one issued as House Docu- 
ment No. 41, the second as Senate Document No. 7. 
It is clear that the 
The third edition of the report was published not by the gov- oa 
ernment, but by H. Long & Brotner, New York, in the same year 
as the others, Tp Not only is this edition an exact copy of oo 
- a 
