PLANT NOMENCLATURE : MORE SUGGESTIONS 295 



with their greater flexibility and much richer vocabularies. In 

 Roman times people did not know much about the Natural Sciences, 

 and did not feel the necessity of defining form, texture, colour, etc., 

 very accurately, nor of dealing at all with histological characters, 

 which latter they had no means of investigating. It is true ingenious 

 and scholarly folk do manage to construct elaborate descriptions in a 

 language resembling Latin, but the same people could, no doubt, do 

 much better in their native tongues. Instead of deleting Rule 36, 

 perhaps it would be advisible to amend it by substituting, for the 

 words " valid only when accompanied by a Latin diagnosis," the 

 words " valid only when accompanied by a diagnosis in Latin or in one 

 of the modern languages which employ Roman characters." 



As regards suggestion No. 2 C, there can, I think, be little differ- 

 ence of opinion, for we must all recognise the absurdity of some of 

 the names cited, which are certainly calculated to bring ridicule 

 on the science. 



As regards suggestion No. 11, I trust British botanists will never 

 agree to the change advocated. I cannot conceive any argument 

 which can justify a proper name being written with a small letter 

 because it happens to be in the genitive case ; and I am surprised that 

 Mr. Sprague, who is evidently a classical scholar, should make the 

 suggestion. It would surely be as reasonable to write " Mr. sprague's 

 paper" as " Luzula forstei'i." 



As regards suggestion No. 12, the only one for which Mr. Sprague 

 advances no reason, I should be sorry to see the comma between name 

 and authority debarred by rule. In the theory of punctuation I take 

 it the comma expresses the slight pause one makes, without dropping 

 the voice, in order to separate a word or words from the context. In 

 reading a name and authorhVy, one would, I think, naturally make 

 just such a pause between them, implying the omitted word " of " 

 (or its equivalent) ; otherwise " Bellis perennis Linmeus " might be 

 a gardener's trinominal. In the Paris " Laws," on which the Vienna 

 " Rules " were based, the comma was used, and the fact that it was 

 omitted in the " Rules" cannot, I think, reasonably be regarded as a 

 pronouncement in favour of the omission by the Congress, represent- 

 ing more probably the individual views of the person or persons 

 responsible for seeing the Rules through the press. 



Looking backward at its effects, one seriously questions the 

 wisdom of Art. IS, whereby the earliest specific name has to be re- 

 instated when a species has been transferred to another genus, apart 

 from the absurdities which Mr. Sprague has pointed out. In com- 

 pliance with this rule, a very large number of generally-accepted 

 names, the significance of which is quite clear, have already been 

 superseded by much less clearly characterized ones, the correct appli- 

 cation of which is by no means certain, thereby giving occasion for 

 difference of opinion, and certainly not making for stability. 



The nomina conservanda scheme, though it has its merits, is by 

 no means free from objection, and obviously can only be carried out 

 by general consent. The weight of the Vienna Congress has evidently 

 not been sufficient to secure this. 



I should like to make the suggestion that, in the case of fossil 



