351 



BOOK-NOTES, NEWS, dc. 



We have received the eleventh Eeport of the Watson Botanical 

 Exchange Club, which does not differ greatly, except in its smaller 

 size, from the reports issued by the older Botanical Exchange Club, 

 and, like them, contains notes by Mr. Arthur Bennett and the 

 Revs. W. Moyle Rogers and W. R. Linton, the last-named acting 

 as distributor. We fail to see any reason why this body should not 

 be united with the Exchange Club, while at least one good argument 

 in favour of such a change is to be found in the extraordinary 

 number of typographical errors which disfigure the Watson Club 

 Report, showing the need of a competent editor. The following 

 note contains so many puzzles that, having solved them for our 

 own benefit, we thinlc it may be well to print the translation for 

 the benefit of those into whose hands the Report may come. We 

 follow the original as closely as possible, but suspect some error in 

 the reference to Opiz's "description" in his " Fl. Bohm.," which, 

 from the citation in Berchtold & Opiz's Flora Bohmens, we should 

 judge to be a MS. list. 



Here is the original, with the suggested corrections : — 

 ^' Sesleria coerulea, ^cvj^.yY.JIa- Sesleria coerulea Scop., v. //'(- 

 vescens, More. Castle Taly, Co. csceus, More. Castle Taylor, Co. 

 Galway, 16th May, 1892.— H. C. Galway, 16th May, 1892.— H. C. 

 Levinge. I suppose this is what Levinge. I suppose this is what 

 is called v. alba, Camus Cat. des is called v. alh((, Camus Cat. 

 Pl.deFrance, p. 292(1888); but PI. France p. 292(1888); but 

 it was named P. lutea by Opiz. it was named v. lutea by Opiz. 

 But several nice points arise over But several nice points arise over 

 this ; Opiz described it in his Fl. this. Opiz described it in his Fl. 

 loh. supt. Cent. 6, n. 560, under Bohm. supt. Cent. 6, n. 560, under 

 Sesleria coerulea, Arducino aui- Sesleria cuerulea, Arduino ani- 

 mado, sp. 2, 18 (1764), not madv. sp. alt. p. xviii (1763), not 

 Schpuli ed. 2 (1772), while Scopoli ed. 2 (1772) ; while 

 Derchtold and Opiz in the Fl. Berchtold and Opiz in Fl. Bohm. 

 Boh. (part 2, 1836) p. 491, place (part i, 1836), p. 491, place 

 it under Sesleria calcaria Persom it under Sesleria calcaria Persoon 

 (1805);Syn.,pl.i, 72. They also Syn. PI. i, 72 (1805). They also 

 quote ''Sesleria coerulea variet. quote "Sesleria coerulea variet. 

 flor. luteo albo Knap in litt." flor. luteo albo Knap in litt." 

 I have not seen Andrews' work I have not seen Arduino's work, 

 so do not know whether there is so do not know if there is any 

 any reason if his name is uu- reason why his name is un- 

 tenable?" tenable. 



We do not know whether questions of botanical nomenclature 

 are about to be transferred to another region of thought, but we 

 observe that Mr. Cattell, who looks after psychology for Science, 

 reprints in that journal his note which we published in our 

 September issue. To this he subjoins our note and a portion 

 of Mr. Erwin Smith's remarks (whicli we quoted at greater length 

 on p. 281), with parts of the Botanical Gazette article to which we 

 referred ; he further points out that we do not withdraw the charges 



