I902 The Field Naturalist' s Library 319 



to introduce to British mycologists the Agarics of European countries." 

 This is a very sweeping assertion to make about British mycologists, as 

 they have for many years taken as their guide the master-work of EHas 

 Fries, the ' Hymenomycetes Europjei,' dated 1874, and which is in- 

 accurately cited in the Bibliography to this work as dated 1876; 

 further, many have worked with Cooke and Quelet's ' Clavis Synoptica 

 Hymenomycetum Europa^orum ' (1878), or Quelet's ' Enchiridion Fung- 

 orum' (1886), and have ultimately referred to Saccardo's ' Sylloge' and 

 other works. Mr Massee's further remarks about the ' Hymenomycetes 

 Europa^i ' are most amusing : " Although not of recent date, this work 

 cannot be omitted, inasmuch as it embodies the experience of over fifty 

 years of continuous observation on the part of the author, and is the 

 sheet-anchor of the present generation of mycologists." Seeing that Fries 

 described at first hand more than nine-tenths of the species enumerated 

 in the present work, it is clear that Fries knew these species, which is 

 more than we can credit the present compiler. 



This work will undoubtedly be of great assistance to the English 

 reader, and its moderate cost, 6s., should place it within the reach of 

 all field workers. It is in the main a translation of foreign works, and 

 we think it is a pity that the author has not kept it abreast of the times. 

 We cite for examples TricJwloma colossiun Fr., which Boudier proved 

 many yea:rs ago was a true Armillaria, Amanitopsis adnata Worthington 

 G. Smith, which equals Amanita jiinquillea Quel., and Agaricus hcunia- 

 tospennus Bull, which is identical with Inocybe echinata^ but which should 

 now be considered a true Lepiota notwithstanding the colour of the spores, 

 and should therefore be cited as Lepiota hcematosperma (Bull) Boud. 



English readers will regret that he has confined his attention to the 

 European Agarics, as a comparison with those occurring in America 

 would have been most interesting. 



We note the addition to the spore groups Chlorospore£e, which we 

 believe the author first enunciated in the Kew ' Bulletin,' but at present 

 it seems too restricted in its range, whilst the sinking of the Porphyro- 

 sporas in the Melanosporas will not, we venture to think, assist the 

 student in his study of these orders. 



Mr Massee has again gone taste-hunting in his rearrangement of the 

 Lactarii, as he had previously done in his ' British Fungus Flora ' for 

 the RussulcC, with an addition to the colouration of the milk. Is this 

 a point worth labouring and making of primary importance ? Does not 

 the famous Fries rightly sneer at Secretan for the wonderful perception 

 of his nose, and do not the present mycologists have different palates, 

 and so appreciate the mildness or acridity of a specimen to a differ- 

 ent extent, and is not this feature also dependent on rapidity or slow- 

 ness of growth, moist condition or dessication, the presence of larval 

 excrement or the deposition of insects' eggs ? It seems to us that 

 widely separated species are thus brought into close proximity without 

 any other character justifying such a position. Lactarius tabidus Fr., 

 printed on p. 70, seems to have bothered Mr Massee as to which group 

 he should assign it to. He there states ; " Owing to absence of descrip- 

 tion of milk, position uncertain." We presume he was translating from 

 the "sheet-anchor," ' Fr. Hym. Eurp.,' but had he consulted either ' Fr. 



