VOL. III.] Recent Literature. 269 



the first three illustrated by excellent plates which I am glad to see 

 are not folders, are described as new. The second paper — Plants 

 Collected by the U.S.S. Albatross, 1887-91. along the Western Coast 

 of America — is by various authors. J. N. Rose: Plants from Cocos 

 and Galapagos Islands; D. C. Eaton: Ferns and Mosses from South- 

 ern Patagonia and Fuegia, with description of one new species 

 Bryiini ccclophyllum; A. W. Evans: List of Liverworts from South- 

 ern Patagonia, with descriptions of two new species, Lophocolea 

 apiadata (pi. xv) and Schistochila quadrifida (pi. xvi); and a short 

 list of Lichens from the same place by Dr. J. W. Eckfeldt. The 

 third paper is a revision of the North American species of HolTman- 

 seggia by E. M. Fisher, and though marred somewhat by careless 

 proof-reading is a valuable contribution. The study includes 17 

 species, two of them, H. Texensis and H. canescens, described as 

 new and 9 new varieties are also characterized. One species, H. 

 intricata, has suffered change of name, the older var. glabra being 

 substituted for it, it seems to me, without due consideration. The 

 writer fully agrees with the proposition that varietal names should 

 be retained when a named variety is raised to specific rank — with one 

 important reservation — that in no case is a specific name to be dis- 

 turbed. For a varietal name can only claim priority as a variety, 

 its specific date being that on* which it was described as a species, 

 any other course would involve the nomenclature in a series of false 

 assumptions and absurdities. The author, for instance, finds him- 

 self unable to attach Watson's name to a species which he never 

 named, yet inferentially appends his own, which can only date from 

 the publication of his paper. As a matter of fact the ndime glabra 

 was passed over for what appeared to be two good reasons. In the 

 first place it is a pure and simple " nomen nudum," and if it were 

 specific instead of varietal could only hold by the courtesy of a sub- 

 sequent describer. In the second place Hofirnanseggia belongs to 

 the category of unstable genera, being regarded as too near Caesal- 

 pinia by Bentham, and unhesitatingly reduced to that genus by 

 Baillon, and there is at least one older valid species of Caesalpinia 

 bearing the specific name glabra. 



Another instance where the author's nomenclature seems to be at 

 fault, according to his own rule, is in using demissa as a varietal 

 name under //; y«/<rarz<a;, though by the synonymy given under it 

 H. deyisifiora is the prior name. 



