377 
the advantages of a scientific relation and an artificial characteri- 
zation, an attempt in which there is no end of room for the exer- 
cise of ingenuity. The result is that in most of them we note a 
combination of obvious “ear-marks” with more complex char- 
acters, : 
It is needless to say that the rules of nomenclature followed 
are those which have been officially adopted by American botan- 
ists and which are evidently in the near future to dominate botani- 
cal writings abroad as well as in America. The code is printed 
and briefly explained in the introduction. In a foot-note reference 
is made to the principal American contributions to the subject of 
nomenclature. The authors would here have done well to include 
one by the writer, who has labored diligently in the interest of 
this movement, especially in medical literature. It appeared in 
the Bulletin of Pharmacy, and set forth clearly and fully the history 
of the movement in this country. The importance of applying 
some system in the application of family names is urged, but its 
introduction, in advance of full discussion and official adoption, is 
wisely omitted. 
The forms of type, use of capitals and symbols and rules of 
Pronunciation are also here briefly explained. 
Throughout the book the accent is indicated in botanical 
names, specific as well as others. sacs 
Much care has been devoted to the selection of the common 
names, which have also been printed in a separate index. It is 
hardly to be hoped that a high degree of satisfaction will be given 
in this direction. Those whose botanical work brings them into 
especial communication with those who speak of plants by their 
common names learn to be quite hopeless about satisfying. local 
ideas (and this the authors have not attempted), except by de- 
voting to synonyms an amount of space quite out of the question 
in such a work. The propriety of excluding a common name of 
Seneral acceptance because it is misleading as to relationship, as, 
for example, “ Dog’s-tooth Violet,” may well be questioned. Com- 
mon names are common property, and where the advisability of 
having them disturbed on scientific grounds has been officially 
considered, as, for example, by the National Bureau on Geographi- 
cal Names, it has been decided indefensible. Upon the other 
