MAL'XD's " THE BOTANIST " 237 



Cabinet, Knowles and Westcott's Floral Cahinei, Sweet's British 

 Flower- Garden, and other magazines can be ascertained. 



The fifth volume seems to have proceeded with regularity for the 

 first half of 1841, except that two plates of the January number 

 (tt. 201, 203) are assigned to " Feb." (Gard. Mag., March 1841, 168) ; 

 tt. 217-219 are cited in the June Gard. Mag. and hence appeared not 

 later than May ; tt. 223 and 231 are specified respectively as " June " 

 and "Aug." (tom. cit. 337, 562). The wrapper of the September 

 number, however, contains an announcement that the " indisposition 

 of parties " concerned prevented its completion in time for publication 

 on the first of the month, and on the October number these circum- 

 stances are said to be still in operation. As has already been said, 

 the November and December wrappers are not at Kew, nor have I 

 been able to see them : judging from Maund's habit of taking his 

 subscribers into his confidence, these would almost certainly have 

 explained the reasons (which I have been unable to ascertain) for the 

 discontinuance of the Botanist and may have given some indication 

 of the dates at which these numbers were issued. 



That the November number appeared in 1841 may be inferred 

 from the reference to "last year (1840) " under t. 242 ; the inclusion 

 of the Botanist in the Gard. Mag. list for August, 1842, shows that 

 the November (and perhaps the December) number had at that time 

 come to hand, as, although they are not quoted for any plant, it was 

 not Loudon's custom to enter at the head of his " Floricultural and 

 Botanical Notices " magazines which he had not actually received : 

 moreover, the Botanist does not appear in later lists. That the 

 December number was not issued in 1841 is evident from the reference 

 tinder t. 248 to " flowers produced in the spring of 1842 " : it may 

 indeed be suggested that the reference to " 1842 " instead of to "last 

 year " may indicate a later date. 



The outcome of these investigations seems to indicate that the 

 date for the termination of the Botanist given in the British Museum 

 Library Catalogue and transferred thence to other works is as in- 

 accurate as that given for its beginning. The date 1846, I am 

 informed, was adopted solely from the fact that the last part Avas 

 delivered under the Copyright Act on Ma}- 9 of that year, the earlier 

 parts having apparenth^ been delivered as they appeared. It seems 

 more likely that this delay resulted from some accident than that 

 there should have been an interval of something like four years 

 between the last and penultimate parts, especiall}' as Maund, a man 

 of energy and business capacity, continued to carry on his other 

 periodical, the Botanic Garden, \ix\i\\ 1851. Under all circumstances 

 it seems that the date given in the Index of English Printed Books 

 (1842) may be accepted as correct; the others cited at the beginning 

 of this paper are manifestly inaccurate in both particulars. 



II. The Magazine. 



So much for the dates : I proceed now to give some account of the 

 Magazine itself, here again gleaning much from the wrappers of 

 the Kew copy. A MS. -note at the head of the wrapper of No. 1 runs : 

 " The Florists' Magazine (complete in 16 numbers) has been circu- 



