300 smith's geokgian plants. 



lobatis scabriusculis lobis lohulisque rotundatis, which are nearly the 

 words of Dr. Solander. The leaves are said to be deciduous. Their 

 rough upper surface is remarkable in the specimens in Sir Joseph 

 Banks's herbarium." (Vol. i. t. xlvii. p. 93.) 



The specimens referred to are from John Bartram, who sent 

 many North American plants to Banks. 



This name seems to have escaped the notice of American 

 botanists, but is duly recorded in the hidex Kewensis, where it is 

 referred as a synonym to the later Q. obtusiloba Mich. (1801). 

 Both, however, must give way to Q. stellata Wang. (1787), adopted 

 by Alphonse De Candolle in the Prodromus — to which Dryander in 

 Solander's MSS. subsequently referred Solander's name. 



Prof. Sargent (Silva .V. Amer. viii. 37) and Dr. Britton (Illustr. 

 Flora, i. 520), in accordance with the newest American rules, 

 raise the varietal name given by Humphrey Marshall in 1785 to 

 specific rank, and call the tree respectively " Quercus minor 

 Sarg." and " Quercus mmor (Marsh.) Sarg." I cannot imagine 

 that botanists generally will assent to the unnecessary confusion 

 which the general adoption of this principle would bring about, 

 and we observe that the Berlin rules sanction no such action. To 

 take an instance : Linnaeus (Species Plant, ed. i. 98) calls the plant 

 figured by Commelin {Hort. Med. Amstel. ii. 185, t. 93) Scabiosa 

 leucantlia ft. spuria. This plant he subsequently {PL rar. Afr. 

 (1760) 8) made the type of his 8. rigida — a name which (under 

 Cephalaria) has been adopted for the same species by all subsequent 

 authors. It thus appears that Linnaeus did not act on any such 

 rule as that recently formulated at Madison, which, if adopted, would 

 necessitate in this case a new combination and needless confusion, 

 for spuria has never been used in connection with the species and 

 has long been forgotten. Moreover, although suitable enough as a 

 varietal name, it is inappropriate for the species, especially when 

 that is put into its right genus and specifically characterized ; in a 

 smaller degree the same objection applies to the adoption of minor, 

 which, although perhaps appropriate to the tree as contrasted by 

 Marshall with Quercus alba, is by no means suitable when the genus 

 at large is considered. 



The oak figured on t. 50 calls for a note. Smith (p. 99) calls it 

 Quercus rubra Linn., and says : — " This kind of Red Oak is distin- 

 guished in Dr. Solander's manuscripts as a variety by the name of 

 ambigua, but was probably thought not sufficiently marked to deserve 

 a place in the Hortus Kewensis.'' The name as a variety has not 

 been taken up, and might have been allowed to pass unnoticed had 

 it not been published by Roemer as a species : he says {Archiv ii. 

 104 — misquoted in DC. Prodr. i. 8 as "coll. i.") of the oak on 

 Abbot's plate 50, " diese ist in dem MS. von Solander Quercus 

 ambigua gennant." 



This indeed is the case ; Solander in his MSS. had first called 

 it rubra, but substituted the name ambigua, with the phrase " foliis 

 cuneiformibus apice trilobis latere integerrimus." Dryander later 

 identified this with Q. nigra L., with a reference to a specimen from 

 Bartram which is doubtless the one written up by him in Herb. 



