General Features 35 



twenty-three new combinations in this genus in the present work, 

 instead of two, by the use of the name Lamprospora. Thus we 

 see that the advocates of usage, which really means nothing, 

 often defeat the very end for which we are all working. 



Some have attempted to adopt Saccardo's Sylloge Fungorum 

 as a basis for usage. Although this is a most valuable index, 

 it can scarcely be so used in the present group, for, as already 

 pointed out, Saccardo has adopted a system of classification 

 which leaves entirely out of consideration the most important 

 morphological character, that of the presence or absence of the 

 operculum in the ascus. The genus Bulgaria as treated by 

 Saccardo contains both operculate and inoperculate species, 

 which according to present-day students of Discomycetes belong 

 in different sections of the cup-fungi. Not only are operculate 

 and inoperculate species placed in the same genus but the 

 inoperculate are in this case treated first and have come to be 

 regarded as typical, although the genus was originally established 

 on an operculate species. 



After considering the above and other suggestions of the 

 advocates of usage, their propositions have been discarded as 

 absolutely impracticable and not at all conducive to the ends 

 which we all have in view, stability of nomenclature. Even the 

 most radical change made In the present work, the substitution 

 of Patella for Lachnea, could not have been avoided by the most 

 ardent advocates of usage, for even they would not tolerate the 

 use of the same name for two different plant genera. 



The writer, however, is merely stating his position in the 

 matter and has no desire to force his views upon anyone else. 

 Those who have been in the habit of calling Patella scutellata 

 a Lachnea will doubtless continue to do so whether the name is 

 tenable or not. The writer, himself, will probably continue to 

 do the same by force of habit. The tenable name has been 

 adopted in this work, believing that it is just as easy for the new 

 student of the younger generation to learn the right name as 

 the wrong one, assuming that the one adopted here is right. 

 By right we mean in accordance with the principles laid down 

 by some well-formulated code. So far as the writer is aware, 

 the name Lachnea would not be recognized as tenable under 

 any existing code. 



In following the rules of the American Code of Nomen- 

 clature, the writer, therefore, feels that he has adopted the course 

 which will bring about the least possible confusion. 



