BRITISH BOTANY IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY 181 



detain ns long. The additional localities were mostly derived 

 from Hopkirk's Flora Glottiftna {\8lH), and notes supplied by 

 Robert M;iughan, II. K. Greville. and others. In the Fangi, 

 Persoon's Si/nopsis is followed, and Sowerby's figures are quoted. 

 Mi/osutis repens and Hierochloe horealis are here first recorded as 

 natives. 



Later in the same year (1821) a very interesting work appeared 

 — namely, Gray's Natural Arraiujemeut of British Plants, "according 

 to their relations to each other as pointed out by Jussieu, De Can- 

 dolle, Brown, &c., including those cultivated for use, with an 

 Introduction to Botany, in which the terms newly introduced are 

 explained ; illustrated by figures." This work, though nominally 

 by Samuel Frederick Gray, was mainly written by his son, John 

 Edward Gray. It contains twenty-one good plates, dated "Nov. 1st, 

 1821." In the preface, Gray gives as a reason for not quotin<^ the 

 plates of English Botany the very high price of the work — generally 

 not less than fifty guineas ; he therefore quotes Gerard and Parkin- 

 son. The introduction contains a short history of the progress of 

 botany, and a list of works from 14G8 to 1821. 



One remarkable feature in this work is the nomenclature, for 

 the author has, in a large number of instances, rejected the names 

 of Linnaeus, especially his specific names, and given new ones of liis 

 own invention. He always does this where the Linnean specific 

 name is a substantive — thus, Achiilm Ptanrdca becomes A. nylrt^stris; 

 Aoras Calamus, A. undnlatm; Aisma Plantago, A. ynajnr ; and so on. 

 As a '* Flora" of the country in the modern sense, this work could 

 be of very little use, as Gray gives hardly any localities, even for 

 the rarer species. 



Tlie year 1823 saw the commencement of R. K. Greville's Scottish 

 Cryptogainic Flora, followed next year by his Flora Fdinensis. And 

 now we have a very important work to review. Sir J. E. Smith, 

 who had done so much for British Botany, crowned his efforts by 

 his excellent English Flora, the first two volumes of which appeared 

 in 1821. The first volume is dedicated to Sir Thomas Gery Cullum, 

 and in a long and interesting preface Smith reviews the cliief works 

 on British Botany, commencing with How's Phytoloyia Britannica 

 (1650). Adverting to his share in the production oi English Botany, 

 he says : " My name at first did not appear ; but, finding the book 

 a fit vehicle for original information and criticism, I publicly 

 acknowledged it by a preface to the fourth volume in 1795, and the 

 title-page of every succeeding volume declares its real author" ; but, 

 notwithstanding this, he complains of *' the flippancy with which 

 everybody quotes ' Sowerby,' whom they know merely as the 

 delineator of the plates, without adverting to the information of 

 the work or the name of its author." As to his Flora Bntannira, 

 he says: "The chief merit to which this work aspires is originality. 

 The author has examined everything for himself, copying nothing 

 without investigation." In this preface and in the entire work Smith 

 most improperly ignores Gray's Xatmal Arrangement, even having 

 the hardihood to say, " I have for the first time in a general British 

 Flora introduced the Natural Orders of our plants " ! Smith's 



