o i.\'n:oDi cTioN. 



I'hus 1 was induced to begin a complete re- 

 visal and critical examination of all doubtful or 

 involved (icnera chiefly ; of which the number 

 is incredible, owing to the absurd usual mode of 

 forming Genera by a single sp. or a few only, to 

 which others are referred at random^ by mere 

 habit, external appearance, or in spite of pecu- 

 liar generic features or characters. 



In fact when Linneus began a Century ago 

 to reform Botany, he was compelled to go on 

 by gradual steps ; any other mode would have 

 been too abrupt. He had the merit to fix Gen- 

 eric names, and to invent Specific names, ad- 

 ding to these a short diagnosis in imitation of 

 the former phaseologic names. 



It has been very well observed that the speci- 

 fic diagnosis or essential character of plants can 

 only become fixed, when all the Species of a 

 Genus are known ; which will never happen un- 

 til the whole Earth is explored thoroughly. 

 Thus the epitomic characters applied to Sp. by 

 Linneus, have been found totally inadequate 

 and inacurate, always involving many distinct 

 species. Botanists were compelled to change 

 and swell them gradually to a kind of epitomi- 

 cal description, until they have lately run into 

 the opposite extreme, and Hooker has even 

 some of 75 words ! or as long as a common min- 

 ute description. It is our duty to seek the most 

 conspicuous, constant or discriminating, and to 

 reduce them to the most essential terms in the 

 least compass. 



Generic diagnosis were also too much con- 

 densed by Linneus and his school; they have 

 been improved by making them essential in 

 their respective tribes, and adding some import- 

 ant features of the habit, inflorescence A-c. The 



