72 Writings of Edward L. Greene. [zoE 



Phaca densifolia Smith in Rees' Cycl. (1819) [vol. xxvii]. 

 Ribes malvaceum Smith Rees' Cycl. xxx (1815J. 

 Ribesferox Smith Rees' Cj'cl. xxix (1815). 

 Ribes stamineum Smith Rees' Cycl. (1815). [Smith's paper 

 on Ribes is eight pages in length, and entirely in Vol. xxx.] 



Viola adtinca Smith Rees' Cycl. (xxxvii) 18 17. 



These are but examples of numerous others, a few of which 

 will be noticed in subsequent pages, and yet, Mr. Greene, as is 

 well known, poses as bibliographical purist, and is remarkably 

 fond of pointing out the shortcomings of others in this respect.* 



The genera proposed by Mr. Greene are, with the notable 

 exception of " Biolettia," founded on sections of other authors, 

 on aberrant species to which attention had been called by others, 

 or as substitutes for older names which he considers untenable. 

 The changes made by the resurrecting of synonyms and the 

 rejection of homonyms are of much greater extent and made as 

 most of them are without judgment or sufl5cient research have 

 inflicted an appalling synonymy upon the Flora of California. 



The principal generic changes so far made or adopted by 

 Mr. Greene in his Flora Franciscana and other papers, are : 



Clematitis L- instead of Clematis I,. This is one of the 

 changes in which Mr. Greene follows Otto Kuntze. It is 

 effected by taking as the lyinnean date the first edition of the 

 Systema Naturae, two years earlier than the period commonly 

 received. The additional syllable in the name seems the only 

 thing to be gained by this transfer. 



KumlieJiia, Greene founded on Ranunculus hystriculus, prin- 

 cipally on the utricular akenes, though they are hardly more 

 utricular than in R. N'uttallii or even in the common R. Cymba- 

 laria. 



Chrysaniphora, Greene for Darlingtonia because there is an 

 older Darlingtonia in synonymy. As, however, the "once a 



* The latest of these diatribes is to be found in " Erythea^' for May, 

 1893, where the author, in the course of "damning with faint praise" 

 Professor McMillan's Metaspermas of the Minnesota Valley, says, "We 

 might have expected much of bibliographical laxitj' and inaccuracj' in any 

 author who could speak of Watson's Index as being a book 'remarkably 

 exact.' " 



