176 ARTHUR-BISBY— TRANSLATION OF SCHWEINITZ'S 



library was not large, but what works it contained can only be in- 

 ferred. There are no records, of books having been given to the 

 Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia or to the American 

 Philosophical Society, and no such books are now in possession of 

 his descendants. In a letter to the senior author, dated December 

 2, 1916, the Rev. Dr. Paul de Schweinitz, secretary of missions of 

 the Moravian Church now living at Bethlehem, Pa., says that his 

 grandfather who died in 1834 " left four sons, the oldest of whom 

 [Emil] was only eighteen. The presumption would naturally be 

 that when his widow died twenty-four years afterward [in 1858] 

 his [botanical] books would have been divided among the sons, but 

 I do not recall seeing any in my father's library. My father 

 [Robert] was the last of his four sons to die." The widow of the 

 third son, Mrs. Edmund de Schweinitz, is still living in Philadelphia 

 and graciously received Dr. C. L. Shear and the senior author on 

 the evening of February 5, 1917, but did not recall having ever seen 

 any of Schweinitz's botanical books. 



It is probable that the current works of Pursh, Michaux, Nuttall, 

 Darlington, Bartram, Torrey , Barton, IMuhlenberg, and other American 

 botanists of the time were at his disposal in studying the flowering 

 plants. Of these doubtless Barton's " Flora of Philadelphia " 

 (1818), but above all Muhlenberg's "Catalogue" (1813, 2d edition 

 in 1818) and Torrey's writings were in constant use. Although 

 Amos Eaton, of Yale College, published a "Manual of Botany" in 

 1818, with successive editions until 1840, it does not appear to have 

 been his guide in matters of nomenclature. 



There were no American works on fungi at the time Schweinitz 

 was most active in preparing his important contributions. Naturally 

 he brought to this country the knowledge and many of the books 

 which had aided in making the " Conspectus of Fungi about Niesky," 

 prepared by himself and his teacher, Albertini, a work of standard 

 value. In that work, as well as in the Carolina list he followed 

 Persoon very closely as his model, and did not think it advisable to 

 attempt any marked deviation from what he considered an authori- 

 tative nomenclature and systematic arrangement. In 1825 Link's 

 treatment of the Hyphomycetes and Gymnomycetes for Willdenow's 

 edition of the " Species Plantarum " became available, and received 

 Schweinitz's full indorsement. 



