316 NOTICES OF BOOKS. 
we have no hesitation in pronouncing this object to be one of the 
greatest importance to the interests of- horticulture and arboriculture, 
as well as of botanical science, and we earnestly hope that the views of 
the committee to whom the cultivators of these pursuits are under so 
great obligations will be liberally responded to. j 
We cannot dismiss this subject without an appeal against the mode 
adopted of making public (if indeed a printed communication without 
date or publisher be called so) the names of the new, or supposed 
new, plants discovered by Mr. Jeffrey, namely, the registering provi- 
sional names with “Oregon Committee” as authority. To take one 
example :— i 
“6906. Ribes Shastense, Oreg. Com. Shasta Butt. At an eleva- 
tion of 7000 feet, on granite débris. Fruit round, covered with long 
prickles.” : 
Can the Oregon Committee for a moment suppose that a name thus 
thrust into the records of science will be respected, eyen if it should be 
registered in botanical works? Tt is neither fair to expect it, nor fair 
to scientific men that their progress should be impeded by such a 
stumbling-block as an awkward name for an undescribed plant, vouched 
for by an authority that is botanically worthless. So long as the names 
of the Oregon Committee do not appear, botanists can have no oppor- 
tunity of judging of the botanical acquirements of the gentlemen of 
whom it may consist; and as it is of the utmost importance that m 
attaching the author’s name to a species, the name should give confi- 
dence to the publie in the species so published, it is essential that 
some more definite authority be supplied than the committee of a tem- 
porary association of gentlemen of no recognized scientific status. Not 
only are upwards of a dozen plants thus registered with new names 
and no cháracters at all, or in a few cases with wholly insufficient de- 
scriptions; but in one instance we find the Oregon Committee using 
still more objectionable means to command a place amongst syste- 
matists. In the case of a Cruciferous plant with no good flowers, . 
pronounced by Sir W. Hooker to be a new Arabis, or perhaps a — 
genus, the Committee propose calling it ** 4, Shastensis, Oreg. Com.’ 
in one case, and “ Jeffreya Shastensis, Oreg. Com." in the other; thus 
confessing their own inability to determine a botanical point, and pay- 
ing a very bad compliment to Mr. Jeffrey and his exertions. If Mr 
Jeffrey merits a new genus being dedicated to him—and no doubt he 
