462 Transactions. 



In another part of this paper I have mentioned the chief reasons 

 which have induced almost all English botanists, up to the pre- 

 sent time, to support the view that not the earliest specific 

 epithet but the earliest name in the correct genus should receive 

 the acceptance of botanists. While regretting the decision of 

 the Congress, I am prepared to admit that, in the interests 

 of botanical science, it is necessary that the rules should be 

 generally accepted and implicitly followed. I therefore trust 

 that fina'ity has been reached on this question, and that all 

 working botanists will adopt the new rule. 



Article 50. — " No one is authorised to reject, change, or 

 modify a name (or combination of names) because it is badly 

 chosen, or disagreeable, or another is preferable or better known, 

 or because of the existence of an earlier homonym which is 

 universally regarded as non-valid, or for any other motive 

 either contestable or of little import." This is a valuable rule, 

 inasmuch as it prevents any alteration or tampering with valid 

 names. A name once given must be preserved in its original 

 shape. The only change which can be made is that provided 

 for by Article 57, which permits the correction of a typographic 

 or orthographic error. Even this, as stated in Recommendation 

 30, " must be used with reserve, especially if the change affects 

 the first syllable, and, above all, the first letter of a name." 

 The rule also disposes of the contention that a name once lapsed 

 into synonymy is always a synonym, and cannot again be em- 

 ployed. 



Articles 51-54. — These rules, which should be carefully 

 studied, specify the circumstances under which it is necessary 

 or allowable to reject, change, or modify names, whether ordinal, 

 generic, or specific. They have been carefully framed, and 

 appear to be fair and equitable. The chief reasons are speci- 

 fied in Article 51, which I quote herewith : " Every one should 

 refuse to admit a name in the following cases : (1) When the 

 name is applied in the plant kingdom to a group which has an 

 earlier valid name ; (2) when it duplicates the name of a class, 

 order, family, or genus, Ol a subdivision or species of the same 

 genus, or a subdivision of the same species; (3) when it is 

 based on a monstrosity ; (4) when the group which it designates 

 embraces elements altogether incoherent, oi when it becomes a 

 permanent source of confusion or error." 



Article 55. — The important part of this rule is the second 

 clause, providing that specific names must be rejected when 

 they simply repeat the generic name. This rule will effectually 

 put an etui to such combinations as Linaria Li nana, Abutilon 

 Abutilon, Petroselinum Petroselinum, &c, which have, through 

 the craze for priority at any cost, come into partial use during 



