220 THE JOURNAL OP BOTANY 



Myrtacece and Melastomacece have become mutually displaced, and 

 what Phili2)2)ia is doing in the Umbelliferous galley is not evident. 



Strong objection must be taken to Dr. de Wildeman's practice 

 of publishing specific names without a reference ; thus we find, 

 inter multa alia, reference to Sojjubea Kassneri Pilger " in hb. 

 Berol." for a plant already described, and other determinations 

 similarly authenticated of species still lacking a published 

 description ; the names, too, of several of Mr. Edmund Baker's 

 Crotalarias not yet formally published appear here simply 

 with " Baker sp. nov." after them ; also we are given no means 

 of distinguishing the younger botanist from his venerable father, 

 who must have been a marvel of precocity if he was already 

 writing, as we are told he was, in Hooker's London Journal oj 

 Botany seventy-one years ago ! 



One is sorry to make remarks of this kind concerning a work 

 not without its good points. The many descriptions of new species 

 are written, as is usual with Dr. de Wildeman, in an admirably clear 

 manner, and the photographic plates show up the species more 

 effectively than is often the case with that style of illustration. 

 But there are too many signs of haste throughout the memoir to 

 enable one, after careful examination, honestly to praise it without 

 many reservations. g_ ^ 



Two Additions to British Local Floras. 



A Supplement to the Flora of Somerset. By Edward Shearburn 

 Marshall, M. A., F.L.S. 8vo, cloth, pp. iv. 242. Taunton: 

 Published by the Somersetshire Archteological and Natural 

 History Society. 1914. Price 7s. 6d. 



Flora Orcadensis : containing the Flowering Plants arranged 

 according to the Natural Order by Magnus Spence, and the 

 Mosses by Lieut. James Grant. 8vo, cloth, pp. xcv. 148. 

 With Maps and Portraits. Kirkwall : D. Spence. 1914. 

 Price 4s. 



The extent of Mr. Marshall's Siipplement to R. P. Murray's 

 Flora of Somerset (1893-6) confirms the view always held by the 

 present writer that the estimate of Murray's book published in 

 this Journal for 1897 (p. 150) was somewhat too high — it was a 

 good book, but hardly of " first-rate botanical excellence," falling 

 short as it did of the standard raised by Trimen and Dyer's 

 Flora of Middlesex (1869), and mixintained by many other works, 

 of which Mr. White's Flora of Bristol (1912) is the most recent. 

 The Somersetshire portion of the last-named work has been made 

 full use of in Mr. Marshall's book; indeed, he calls it his " main- 

 stay," an estimate which seems a little over-generous, for the 

 Supplement owes its chief value to Mr. Marshall's own notes, 

 and to the greatly extended information regarding the plants of 

 the county and their distribution. 



In some respects the Supplement is susceptible of improve- 

 ment. There should have been an introduction in which the 



