62 BOTANICAL GAZETTE. 



One of the first things we teach our pupils in science is the appropriateness and 

 beauty of scientific names. We expatiate upon tliem vvitli great pleasure and generallj- 

 make the theme attractive, but no sooner docs our tyro get well into the meshes of a 

 science, than he finds one after another of its nice distinctions failing utterly, and tluit 

 to follow tlie literal meanings would often totally mislead. Thus we learn to regard 

 technical names, espcciallj' those coming down from the old masters, as distinctive 

 only, not necessarily descriptive. Names denoting locality are often quite as unfortun- 

 ate as descriptive ones. I could fill the Gazkttp; with proofs that descriptive names as 

 often fail in time to distinguish objecls, as they continue to distinguish them. The 

 name becomes merely a meaningless term, retained out of reverence for tiie author or 

 to show the early conception of the object. 



Linnteus and Cuvier — w^orthies held in reverence by every true lover of nature — 

 were the jiioneers of modern research, and no better proof of their ability is needed 

 than the statement that they studied and gave scientific names to every plant and ani- 

 mal known at their day, many of which names are retained to the present and, no 

 doubt, a few will be until the end of time; but, as a matter of history, nine-lenths of 

 their names have been quietly dropped or boldly overruled by subsequent scientists 



The thing aimed at in nomenclature is distlnciiceiu'ss; the giving of such a name 

 as will forever distinguish tiie object from every other in creation. In the naming of 

 large families the disrinctions l)ecorae less prominent and certain, while upon the 

 accession of a large number of species, the whole family has again and again to be re- 

 vised. Each scientist aims as far as [jossilile to give descriptive names, but each learns 

 from his predecessors how meaningless most of them become; so he easts about him 

 for other names that will utirk he hopes, through time. 



And riglit here comes in one of the most beautiful and touching characteristics of 

 the true scientist — the recognition of the labors and merits of others. Full well he 

 knows the toil and exposure of the explorer, the study and pains-taking of the discov- 

 erer; and also how illy both are requited with this world's goods; so he is ever ready 

 to give the poor meed of honor to whom honor is due. With an object before him, the 

 result of severe exploration or research, how naturally that the discoverer's name 

 sliouid be indelibly associated with the new object; and with what love and loyalty he 

 coins it into a technical distinction for the object given l)y unmeasured toil to science 

 and the world. 



Generic names are Latin nouns arbitrarily formed often from some medicinal or 

 other virtue, real or supj)csed, or some resemblance to other objecls, or they are derived 

 from a country, or they are old classic words of no meaning whatever; and lastly tiiey 

 are sometimes coined from the name of a distinguislie<l scientist or patron of science. 

 Specific names are Latin adjectives, singular in number and agreeing in gender with 

 the name of their genus. They are mostly founded upon distinctive characters, resem- 

 blances, uses, etc., and (piite often are commemoraiive names. Specific honorary 

 names are of two kinds: possessive and dedicative. If the jtcrson honored is the dis- 

 coverer, his or her name is used in the form of the Latin genitive (or ])ossessive case), 

 as, ViolK Nattallou ChcllduihtH Ooopmi'. If the name is conferred as a recognition of 

 merit, it is used as an adjective ending in «»,\, ua or niiik; as Ceaiiofhus Veitchianns, 

 C/i/nix Mil rill iHi, and hiliiuii BloDinfriainiiii, when the object is said to be dedicated 



The number of commemorative names of necessity will alwaj's be few compared 

 with descrijjtive ones, but as every science has a small number it is (juite certain that 

 each will alwa\-s retain a tew in accordance with the law of human kindness, which, it 

 is hoped, will always meet return. 



Wiiat warm heart does not cheerfully acquiesce in the grateful aflection of emi- 

 nent scientists who have dedi(%itetl certain small genera of plants or animals to Lin- 

 naeus, Cuvier, Jussieu, DeCaudolle, Levoisier, Maximowicx, Agassiz, Adanson, Audu- 



