120 THE AMERICAN BOTANIST 



in due time and compare them with those of 0. imbricaria, 

 leaving that to Dr. Sargent who will include the tree in his 

 new issue of the "Trees of North America." He suggests 

 the name of heterophylla, which will probably be adopted. I 

 am merely telling' the story while I can, so that others visiting 

 Washington may. if they choose, see for themselves. 



AMPHICARPAEA 



By Dr. W. W. Bailey. 



THE late William Whitman Bailey, for many years pro- 

 fessor of botany in Brown University, was a facile and 

 entertaining writer on botanical subjects and frequently fav- 

 ored this magazine with contributions. Among papers of this 

 kind remaining imprinted is the one which follows upon a 

 familiar denizen of dryish woodlands. It is a good example 

 of the way a sympathetic treatment may make common things 

 interesting. — Editor. 



Serious fault is often found, and not unnaturally, with 

 botanical titles. They are spoken of as long, unwieldy, bar- 

 barous, and it is asked why we do not call the plants by their 

 common names. Certainly some appellations are ill-bestowed, 

 and a few, fortunately a very few, are even indecent. These 

 last, however, not being translated, pass current in most cases 

 without a thought. Their euphony carries them as does music 

 the objectionable words of some opera libretto. 



But ill-sounding or disagreeable appellations are not con- 

 fined to the Latin. A pretty 'little twiner extremely common in 

 our Northern woods is known as hog-peanut. Surely its 

 botanical name which heads this article, though at first sight 

 formidable, is euphonious and pretty. It alludes to the two 

 kinds of pods borne by the plant, one sort above ground, the 

 other subterranean. The upper ones are scythe-shaped, con- 



