128 The Plant World. 



of mind. A refreshing exception to most of the literature on 

 this subject is a paper by Prof. W. G. Farlow on "A Considera- 

 tion of the Species Plantarum of Linnaeus as a Basis for the 

 Starting Point of the Nomenclature of Cryptogams." 



The author assumes at the outset that the adoption of the 

 Species Plantarum of Linnaeus (1753) by the Vienna Congress 

 in 1905 made its acceptance as near universal as could ever be 

 expected in such a case, and that this work may be taken as well 

 adapted to serve as a basis for the nomenclature of Phaenogams. 

 The cogent reasons adduced for this view should be sufficient, 

 it would seem, to satisfy any reasonable being. 



As regards the Cryptogams, however, the case is quite 

 different. "One would be glad to adopt as a basis of nomen- 

 clature some one work which bears the same relation to Cryp- 

 togams as does the Species Plantarum to Phaenogams, but there 

 has never been any such work and there never will be." For the 

 fungi, however, which offer a better field for comparison than 

 other groups, Professor Farlow suggests the Systema Mycologi- 

 cum of Elias Fries (1821 and later) as better adapted than any 

 other work, and records his conviction that in any case to go 

 back earlier than the Synopsis of Persoon would only tend to 

 perpetuate the present uncertainty and confusion and would 

 open the door to those who, regarding nomenclature as an end 

 in itself, and not merely a means by which the necessary evil 

 of naming plants can be reduced to a minimum, devote time and 

 labor to the undesirable task of unearthing names which at best 

 are uncertain^/at the sacrifice of names which have been in uni- 

 versal use for many years, and whose meaning is perfectly clear. 



/ 



