134 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 



Cambridge University Herbarium." In a few cases, cultivated 

 examples have been used, but by the co-operation of numerous 

 botanists Mr. Hunnybun has been supplied with specimens of 

 most of the species which were not gathered by himself. The 

 orginal pen-and-ink drawings were presented by Mr. Hunnybun 

 to the University ; many wei'e previously circulated among 

 botanists, who expressed a high opinion of their artistic merit and 

 scientific value. The number of forms presented is remarkable 

 and, at any rate so far as British botany is concerned, unique ; 

 thus Pojmlus iind A triplex are represented by 17 plates, Ulmus by 

 16, Salicornia by 12. They are reproduced by a special process 

 and are mostly in outline ; the few dissections added in most 

 cases, are not, we understand, considered by experts as altogether 

 satisfactory. For the botanical accuracy of the plates the name of 

 Dr. Moss is sufficient guarantee, and Mr. Hunnybun is to be 

 congratulated on the success with which he has, in most cases, 

 succeeded in conveying the habit — the port, as the French more 

 expressively put it — of the plants : this is especially notable in 

 the PolygonacecB and Chenoj^odiacecB. The plates of Salicornia 

 form an important contribution to the knowledge of the genus 

 and will we think be welcomed by Continental as well as by 

 British botanists. The branches of trees please us less ; from 

 the artistic standpoint they leave a good deal to be desired. In 

 many cases the specimens seem to have been thrown down any- 

 how and to have been drawn as they fell — we do not suppose that 

 such was the case, but it is certainly the impression conveyed. 

 This is the more to be regretted because the size of the page 

 enables the specimens to be fully displayed, and there thus seems 

 no reason why they should be placed across one another as they 

 are in numerous instances — e. g. nos. 2, 19, 20, 28 ; the object may 

 have been to avoid a formal and diagrammatic appearance, but we 

 think anyone who will contrast these with nos. 18, 22, 23, 26, will 

 prefer the more formal arrangement. In many of the Atriplexes 

 and Chenopods the separate leaves are scattered about in a casual 

 way as if they had fallen from a height on to the paper, usually 

 pointing downwards. In many cases, too, where a fragment of a 

 plant only is given, the whole might well have been displayed. A 

 study of the figures in some of the sixteenth-century herbals, 

 notably those of Brunfels (1530) and Leonard Fuchs (1542-3) 

 would, we think, have resulted in the production of figures not 

 less accurate but far more artistic as well as more informing ; a 

 comparison of Mr. Hunnybun's plate of Knotgrass with Fuchs's 

 figure will illustrate our meaning. 



A like criticism applies to many of the plates which form the 

 raison d'etre of Mrs. Perrin's handsome volume — the first of four — 

 on British Floivering Plants, on the title-page of which, by an 

 excess of modesty, her name does not appear. Many of these are 

 extremely good, although, well reproduced as they are, they are 

 not as good as the original drawings, in the exhibition of which 

 we noticed some — notably that of the Sloe, to appear in a later 

 volume — of really supreme excellence. Turning over the pages, 



