Mk. Jackson's index. 34? 



by the inclusion of the book in the list of " works in preparation 

 at the Royal Gardens, Kew," which appears on the cover of the 

 Bnlletin of Miscdlawoiis Information for September, where, more- 

 over, it is stated to be " by Sir Joseph Hooker and Mr. B. Day don 

 Jackson." Geograpliically, no doubt, this connection of tlie work 

 with Kew is accurate, thouijh tiie statement that it was " in 

 preparation " during September is inexact ; but the intrusion of 

 the word " Kewensis " on the title, the omission of the actual 

 compiler's name from the preface, and the ascription of the book to 

 a joint authorship is misleading, and in the opinion of many besides 

 myself conveys a false impression. I will add that I personally 

 need no acknowledgement of such help as I was able to give to 

 Mr, Jackson ; but it was by permission of Mr. Carruthers that, in 

 consideration of the importance of the Index to botanical science, 

 I was allowed to read and check the proofs during ofiicial hours, 

 and it was understood that the British Museum should be acknow- 

 ledged in the preface. I am sure that Mr. Jackson would have 

 carried out this understanding, and that the omission of the preface 

 is not in accordance with his desires. 



An introduction was moreover absolutely essential to the under- 

 standing of the plan of the book. The readers of this Journal are 

 indeed in possession of information as to the general lines laid down ; 

 this will be found in the volume for 1887 (pp. QQ>, 150) and in other 

 places. But even the fact that the Genera Plantarum of Bentham 

 and Hooker has been taken as the basis of the work cannot be 

 ascertained from the book as it stands ; and the numerous and 

 important points necessary to its right using must be guessed at, 

 for they are nowhere stated within its covers. Mr. Jackson has 

 been extremely careful to abbreviate intelligently the titles of the 

 very numerous works he has quoted ; perhaps it would have been 

 too much to expect a list of these, altliough, if in chronological 

 order, such a list would have done much to supply the unfortunate 

 omission of the dates of the species. In an introduction we should 

 have been informed why, for example, M. Gandoger's species are 

 passed over; and certain almost inevitable inconsistencies in citation 

 might have been put straight — in short, the book as it stands is in- 

 complete. I am glad to see that tlie (iardeners Chronicle takes the 

 same view as that which is here expressed, It is to be hoped that 

 the Supplement which M. Durand and Mr. Jackson have in hand, 

 bringing the enumeration down to the present year, will supply 

 what is so urgently needed. 



The present instalment does not differ from the previous parts 

 of the work, and merits equal praise. There are, as usual, a few 

 slips, but there is no need to point them out. One such will be 

 found under Uncaria, where for 



" sessihfructus, Eoxb. Hort. Beng. 86 ; Fl. Ind. i. 520 [1832] " 



should be read — 



sessilicarpa, Eoxb. Hort. Beng. 86 = (nomen) sessilifructus — 

 sessilifructus Eoxb. Fl. Ind. i. 130 (1820). 



I fail to see why Carey's edition of the Flora Indica (1882) should 



