gS BOTANICAL GAZETTE. 



that so far as botanists are concerned, the old liberal ruling is still 

 in force, and that the statement on page 231 of the "Guide to the 

 Flora of Washington and Vicinity," was wholly incorrect. While 

 for one I should only be too glad if this were the case, I still pre- 

 sume that the chief desire of all botanists is to know precisely how 

 the laws are construed by the Post Office Department at the pres- 

 ent time, and with this object in vi >.v I have not only revisited the 

 Department, but have corresponde I officially with it, and if not 

 trespassing too largely upon your columns, I would be glad to have 

 the correspondence published. It seems to cover the whole ground 

 and may render further inquiries unnecessary. 



I desire to sav, however, in advance, that the statement in my 

 flora was too strong and really inaccurate, and especially, that the 

 word "third-class" was an error for fourtk-cliss, which was over- 

 looked in reading the proof. 



Very truly yours, 



Lester F. Ward. 



National Museum, 

 Washington, D. C, June 21, 1882. 

 Hon. Timothy 0. Howe, Postmaster General: 



Sir — I enclos. a leaf from Bulletin, No. 22, of the Nation- 

 al Museum, of which T am the author, upon which [p. 234] are 

 marked passages relating to the sending of written labels with 

 botanical specimens. 



Since the publication of the Bulletin the Department has been 

 asked whether the statements therein were correct, and has replied 

 by sending copies of the Postal regulations of February 21. 1881, 

 and calling special attention to the 7th exception by underscoring 

 the word "'name 1 ' on the last line but one, which action has been 

 published in the Botanical Gazette (June 1882, p. 73). 



The impression seems to prevail that this exception will apply 

 to botanical labels made out in the usual way, of which three sam- 

 ples are inclosed within. 



As labels without authority, locality, or date, are of no scien- 

 tific value it is supposed that these would be construed as necessary 

 "fcr purposes of identification, ,, and therefore legal. 



You are respectfully requested to state whether the Department 

 so construes the regulation, and if not, to indicate such portions of 

 the inclosed labels as would be illegal, and to return the same for 

 the information of the profession, who, rest assured, need only to 

 know the law in order to comply with it. 



Very respectfully, 



Your obedient servant, 



Lester F. Ward. 



