FLORA OF SUFFOLK. 98 



hence notice of Mr. Galpin's book in connection with Dr. Hind's 

 more ambitious ' Flora.' 



Of Dr. Hind's book, the very opposite must be said, so far as 

 printing and general get-up are concerned. It is desirable to enter 

 a protest as to the cumbrousness which is becoming too frequent 

 in local floras, and which is as unnecessary as it is objectionable. 

 The local printer has hardly been well advised in binding his 

 advertisement into the volume, although he is less to blame than 

 those who supervised the work. The type employed for the names 

 of orders and genera is ridiculously large, and the arrangement by 

 which (as on p. 365 and elsewhere) the name of an order, a genus 

 or a species of plant appears by itself on the last line, the remainder 

 of the information following overleaf. The volume is further dis- 

 figured by printer's " ornaments " of the crudest kind, and weighs 

 2 lbs. 6 oz. — no trifling drawback to its use in the field on a 

 summer's day ! 



The Flora proper, although it can hardly take a place in the 

 first rank, is nevertheless a valuable addition to our list of such 

 works, and bears evidence of careful compilation, although it some- 

 what lacks in that personal and intimate knowledge of the plants 

 enumerated which renders Mr. Archer Briggs's Flora of Plymouth so 

 valuable and interesting. Prof. Babington and Mr. Baker have 

 afforded " very special assistance " with the Bubi and Roses ; and 

 Mr. Arthur Bennett has helped in "many ways," though we are 

 not told that the Potamogetons have been named by him. Dr. 

 Churchill Babington and the Rev. E. Skepper left material of 

 "which Dr. Hind, with due acknowledgment, has made good use. 

 Suffolk, indeed, as appears from the interesting chapter on " The 

 Progress of Botanical Study " in the county, has received its full 

 share of attention. Turner, Gerard, Parkinson, Ray, Buddie and 

 Smith, all record plants for the county ; while such local botanists 

 as the Cullums, Pitchford, Dawson Turner, Lilly Wigg, Henslow, 

 and the Pagets have contributed to make its flora better known. 

 F. K. Eagle is hardly correctly described (p. 487), as "of the 

 beginning of the present century," as he did not die until 1856; 

 and "the genus Cidliimia-Lisianthus" (p. 478) is a curious 

 misprint. The number of herbaria of Suffolk plants in existence 

 is noteworthy, and Dr. Hind has made good use of them. 



An interesting feature of the book is the " Palaeontological 

 Botany of Suffolk," based on the researches of Mr. Clement Reid 

 in the Cromer Forest bed ; the comparison of the Suffolk Flora 

 with that of Holland is useful, although it might have been more 

 complete. It is to be regretted that Dr. Hind has taken upon 

 himself to alter certain names, as in substituting Epithymus for 

 Epithymum, "as the latter is incorrect in form." And it would 

 have been well to have given the local English names in actual 

 use, and to have omitted such monstrosities as " Boehmer's 

 Phleum" and " Puell's (sic) Vernal Grass" (p. 387). The 

 districts into which the Flora is divided are the recognised par- 

 liamentary divisions of the county, and are thus of no value whatever 

 for botanical purposes. 



