. GRAY’S MANUAL, SEVENTH EDITION. 
The new edition of Gray’s Manual has recently appeared un- 
der the joint authorship of Dr, Robinson and Mr. Fernald. 
the same compact and handy volume as before, preserv- 
ing the main features which have become so familiar to two gen- 
erations of botanists, and yet is brought up to date in nomencla- 
ture and arrangement of orders. The Grayan method of descrip- 
tion is still retained, Alterations in sequence and form are many, 
but the changes are more apparent than real. The natural order 
of families according to their genetic relationship is adopted plac- 
ing the lowest families first, but for the most part the order of 
the genera and species in the families is reversed, placing the 
highest first which is a poor arrangement, and follows Gray, 
atson, Britton and the rest. The keys have for the most part 
been entirely reconstructed and for this “all botanists owe them a 
great debt of gratitude. Britton’s 3-volume Flora copied bodily the 
old key of Gray’s Manual and without credit. The book is re- 
markably free from clerical and typographical errors. A few 
_ occur Here and there of minor importance, as in Juncus the deci- 
mal point is misplaced in giving the measurement of the seeds 
so that seeds seem to be longer than the pods in some spec'es. I no- 
tice Corallorhiza maculata is credited to Rafinesque who so far as I 
can find published only a Cladorhiza maculata. Betula crispa is 
credited to Aiton when jt should be Dryand, etc., but such blund- 
ers no book can wholly avoid, as the writer has found out too of- 
ten in his own work. lisma Plantago L. is published as A. 
Plantago aquatica, while Linnaeus did not publish the name. Sal- 
icornia Europcea is published as such while Linnzus seems to 
have given it as S. Europoea herbacea. 
The most material changes or noticeable ones are in the adop- 
tion of the first name of a species instead of the first naine in the 
genus. This as we know is done against the authors’ better judg- 
ment in order to conform to the Vienna code, and though perhaps 
necessary is to be regretted. This alters many names of well 
known plants, but is reduced to a minimum by the retention of the 
excepted genera such Astragalus, etc. The adoption of such 
names as Polypodium polypodioides is indefensible and absurd. 
