VOL. IV.] Reviews. 413 



With the nomenclature of the author, as is perhaps well- 

 known we do not agree, and especially we object to the setting 

 aside of specific for older varietal names, as these last are seldom 

 catalogued in works of reference the element of confusion intro- 

 duced will be of very remote settlement. 



We may safely rely upon Mr. Coville's future knowledge of 

 Western plants, to convince him of the inherent weakness of the 

 generic propositions of " Oreobroma," " Uropappus," " Ptiloca- 

 lais," "Linanthus," " Allocarya," "Sonnea," "Oreocarya," 

 " Eremocarya," " Piptocalyx," etc. 



The metric system is adopted throughout the work as is now 

 the custom in most scientific papers. — brought face to face 

 with the kilometre we are however reminded with more than 

 usual force of the great fault of the system — the inexcusably 

 long terms. The author says: " To those not familiar with this 

 system, the following table * >i= * will be useful." We com- 

 mend this table to the printers and proofreaders of the Depart- 

 ment especially in connection with En'geron calvus described 

 both in Proc. of Biol. Soc. and in this work as " i cm. high 



* * * blades [of the leaf] 1-1.5 cm. long, tapering into a 

 petiole of twice that length * * =i= heads 7 to 8 mm. high." 

 "' Potentilla purpurascens pinetoruvi * * stems about 3 cm. 

 high, radical leaves 7 to 14 cm. long." or Phacelia hispida brachy- 

 antha * * * i to 3 cm. high * =♦= =(< calyx 5 mm. long 



* ~'^ * in fruit reaching 10 mm. long." 



The whole number of species and varieties described as new 

 is 42. The author has described them with conscientious care 

 and tolerable fullness. The greater number are valid as far as 

 we can be certain from the text and the plates in which 21 of 

 the species are figured. Very few of the types have been seen 

 by us, but Mr. Coville promi.ses a very welcome set to the 

 Herbarium of the California Academy of Sciences, where it will 

 be accessible to all botanists of the West. 



Aqnilegia pubescens seems too closely related to A. chrys- 

 a fit ha. 



Agreeing with Trelease Mr. Coville considers T. platycar- 

 picjn as not more than a variety of Fendleri, he quotes in the 

 synonymy Pitt, i, 166, but appears not to have noticed Mr, 



