318 PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMT. 



This is evidently the commonest and most widely distributed Bpecii 

 the eenus extending from western Mexico t" Tropical Brazil. It is 

 highly variable in stature, foliage, and degree of pubescence; yel floral 

 or even vegetative characters fora satisfactory ^rogation appear to be 

 lacking. Var. glabra, Baker, in Mart. Fl. Bras. vi. pt 8, 1 67, is, to 

 judge from its first mentioned type ( Mandon's no. 80), merelj a smoother 



»ether glabrous form as its description would imply. 

 _ _, _ Dwarf, not creeping, freely branched, smoothish: leaves, at least the 



upper ones, obovate or oblong, Bessile by a narrowed but still Bomewhat 



clasping base : peduncles Bbort or none. 



7. .1. discoid ea, Klut. Arbeit, des Hamb. Botan. Mus. L893, p. 2 

 nt reprint. Heads small mot discoid even in Klatt's type specimen! 

 short-peduncled or sessile: rays small although Blightly exserted, white 

 or pale yellow. Pringle, no. 1279 from the Sierra de las ('races, State 

 <if Mexico (type), also Pringle, no. 73 I'd. Bourgeau, no. L 232, and 

 Schaffner, no. 286, all collected in or near the Valley of .Mexico. Per- 

 haps too near J. hirta. Klatt's ill-chosen name musl be retained with 

 regret. 



++*+***+ Low, creeping: leaves rounded at the ba<o : (ialapairos Island.-. 



8. J. prorepens, Hook. f. Trans. Linn. Soc. xx. 214. — James 

 Island, Darwin. 



Schultz's type) appears to me a mistaken fidelity to an indefinite and inappropriate 

 specific name, especially when Dr. Rusby explains bo carefully that he himself and 

 not Schultz should stand as authority for Uie pappus-bearing 



a, as applied by Dr. Watson, was merely an herbarium name, resting upon an 

 obvious clerical error. Far from being " astonishing," slips of this sort appear to 

 be tolerably frequent in manuscript work of even the most careful botanists. The 

 thoughtless publication of such mistaken names, however, merely adds to the i 



of an already burdensome synonymy. It may be worth while to note in passing 

 that Dr. Rusby's name G.calva is nol only inappropriate and misleading, but that 

 according to the Rochester Code it has no right to stand. <•'. calva, Sch. Bip 

 not. as Dr. Rusby maintains, n nomen nudum. It is clearly given (as Dr. Rusby 

 admits) by Baker in the Fl. Bras. vi. pt. 8, 167 (1884) in the synonymy of Jaegeria 

 hirta, var. glabra. Its Btatus is thereby established, and it is impossible to denj its 

 publication, since it has been used in print together with a description, defining 



synonymy, and the citation of Mandon's no. 80, one of the types originally nun 



tioned by Schultz, But as thus defined it was applied to a Jaet ia. Whether «e 

 ivriti toga calva, Sch. Bip., or G. ca a, Baker, in our Bynonymy of Jaegeria 



r, the combination Ga >a has been a published binomial since II I 



and Dr. Rusby's G. calva, applied to a different plant, is thus a later homonym 

 which a rational application of the Rochester inks would discard. It i- to be 

 hoped thai if any one feels impelled, on account of the '•doctrine of homonyi 

 a n>\\ name to Dr. Rusby's species, the choice may be more felicitous. 



