CHARLES CAUDALE BABINGTON. 259 



was frequently essentially different. The discovery of these facts 

 produced considerable astonishment, and the author was led to 

 consider what could have been the cause of so remarkable a 

 discrepancy. The following appears to be the most probable 

 explanation. It is well known that at the close of the last 

 century Sir J. E. Smith became the fortunate possessor of the 

 Herbarium of Linnfeus, and was thus enabled to ascertain, with 

 very considerable accuracy, the British species which were known 

 to that distinguished man, and to publish, in the most improved 

 form that he had given to his system, a remarkably complete 

 and excellent Flora of Britain. Then followed the long-continued 

 separation of this country from France, and indeed from most of 

 the European nations, by which we were almost completely pre- 

 vented from observing the progress which botanical science was 

 making in other countries, and at the same time our own flora was 

 continually receiving accessions of new plants which it was nearly 

 impossible to identify with the species detected and published in 

 France and Germany. At the conclusion of the war we had become 

 so wedded to the system of Linnreus, and, it may even perhaps be 

 allowable to add, so well satisfied with our own proficiency, that, 

 with the honourable exception of Mr. Brown, there was at that 

 time scarcely a botanist in Britain who took any interest in or paid 

 the least attention to the classification by natural orders which had 

 been adopted in France, and to the more minute and accurate 

 examination of plants which was caused by the employment of that 



philosophical arrangement The publication of so complete 



and valuable a Linn^an work as the Knglish Flora greatly con- 

 tributed to the permanency of this feeling, and accordingly we find 

 that at a very recent period working English botanists were un- 

 acquainted with any of the more modern continental floras, and 

 indeed even now many of those works are only known by name to 

 the great mass of cultivators of British botany." 



The continental floras mentioned as having been consulted for 

 the Manual are entirely German — -Koch's Hijnopsis, Eeichenbach's 

 Icones and Iconographia, and Sturm's Deutschlaiids Flora. In the 

 second edition (1847) Nees's Genera and Schkuhr's Pdedgraser are 

 added. The third and fourth editions (1851 and 1856), although 

 including " many additions and corrections," do not present many 

 noteworthy changes, except in detail : but the care which the 

 author took in revising each edition should be mentioned. Babing- 

 ton's interleaved copies of each issue are preserved in the Cambridge 

 Herbarium, and afford ample evidence of the conscientious work 

 which rendered the often-abused phrase "new edition" no empty 

 formula. Mr. Newbould had a similar copy ; his suggestions were 

 always at Babington's service, and frequently proved useful. 



The fifth edition, published in 1862, is noteworthy for the 

 recommendation of numerous French works, especially Grenier and 

 Godron's Flore de France, and of Fries's Novitice. From this it will 

 be seen that by this time Babington had mastered the contents of 

 the principal critical floras of the Continent, and had recognized 

 their bearing upon British plants. Following his dictum " It is 



s 2 



