NOTES ON TUE INDEX KEWENSIS. 301 



drudge" aud compiler, as Mr. Jackson calls himself (and Sfceudol, 

 in this Journal 1892, p. Gl) in reply to my dedications Steudclai/o 

 and Jacksona/jo, has not had proper thanks for his immense labour 

 aud will now be quoted often merely for his errors, e. g. for the 

 punning name Heluoithus decapitatus Jackson = H. decapctalus L., 

 Quiritia Jackson = Glijciirrldza etc. Few samples more of species 

 not named ander the Kew genus-name : Nasella (15) = Oryzopsia ; 

 Gynopachis (6) = Hainlin : Colladonia (5) = Frangos ; JBulbostylis (5) 

 = Fimbristijlis; Melantheopsis (4) = Breynin (but 13. fruticosa Muell. 

 arg. and B. patens Rolfe are missing); Leucothoe (2) = Agauria ; 

 Amphistelma (18) = Vincetoxicnm ; Eutoca (9) = Phaceliu ; Dufourea 

 (5) = Breweria; Haemodictyon (26) = Prestonia : Duiioi-phostachi/s (9) 

 = Panicum (but D. monostachya = P. monostachyum HBK.) etc. 



Also two valid homonymous species-names occur often in the 

 Kew Index, one of which had to receive a new name, but did not 

 get it, e.g. out of the "addenda": 2 Astrar/alus CandoUcanus (for 

 the second exists already another species-name : supervlsa under 

 Tragacantha), 2 Aster imhricatus (1 = ivorcesterensis OK.), 2 Derris 

 oblomja, 2 Enfjenia polyantlia, 2 Festuca [/racillinia & scabrella, 

 2 Gocchatia ylutinosa, 2 Coccidus d'u'ersifolius, 2 Clenme viicrantha, 

 2 Justicia elegans, 2 Ipomoea decora, 3 Hahenaria gracilis etc. 



Sometimes the aid of the Kew Staff was to be observed in the 

 "addenda," f. i. Ipomoea lilacina Hemsl. and oblonga Hemsl. Biol. 

 Ceutr. Am. Bot. ii. 391 ; but if we look at the referred place, we 

 find only Ipomoea lilacina Schlecht. *^nd I. oblonga Bth., aud no 

 description or indication that could permit to quote Hemsley or his 

 error. Also many grass-names and new identifications probably 

 out of the last not yet (till my manuscript went into the press) pub- 

 lished part of Hooker's Flora of British India are inserted in the 

 "addenda," but my Rev. gen. pi. published 1891 was put aside. 



Ehrhart's 100 nomina usualia 1789 Beitr. iv: 145-150 are 

 names of species and not names of genera, but in the Kew Index 

 they are treated as genera names. If Mr. Jackson had calmly read 

 my Rev. gen. pi. pag. xxv he would not have given in the 

 "addenda" these names of Ehrhart among genera-names; e.g. 

 there exist for 13 species of Carex such names and they are no 

 synonyms of the genus Carex as indicated in the Kew ludex. 

 They are strongly to be excluded as well as Dochnall's grapes 

 names in the same generic fashion. It is very irritating to find in 

 the "addenda" of the Kew Index e. g. CaUithroniuw, Lonchophyllam 

 and Xiphophyllum Ehrh. 1789 = Cephalanthera Rich. 1818 ; Cardio- 

 phyllum Ehrh. 1789 = Listera R. Br. 1813 ; Mariscus Ehrh. 1789 

 = Mariscus Gaertn. (twice wrong because Ehrhart's species is 

 Mariscus Haller 1742 = Cladium P. Br. 1750, whereas Mariscus 

 Gaertn. is a mere section of Cyperus according to most authors) ; 

 Trichophyllum Ehrh. 1789 = Eleocharis P. Br. 1810 ; Diplorrhiza, 

 Triplorrhiza etc. Ehrh. 1789 = Habenaria W. 1805 ; Moitanthium 

 Ehrh. 1789 = Uynchospora Vahl 1806. No one of these nomina 

 usualia of Ehrhart can claim priority. 



In the "addenda" of the Kew Index are also inserted all names 

 given in 1790 by Norouha, which however are according to my 



