BOTANICAL NOMENCLATURE. 365 



citation, so well insisted on by M. De CandoUe, that no author 

 is to be represented as saying the thing that he does not say. 

 The alternative course is to write " Linnjea, Linn.," which is 

 certainly what Linnaeus has not said. The only authors we 

 know of who have on principle followed this alternative — 

 and a notable exception it is — ai-e Benthani and Hooker in 

 the new " Genera Plantarum," against which a protest was 

 made in this Journal when the first part was issued. They 

 have followed the rule that botanical genera began with Lin- 

 nseus so strictly as to cite even authors as recent as Ga^rtner 

 for Tournefortian genera and to ignore botanists like Gro- 

 novius, contemporary with Linnaeus, and publishing since the 

 year 1737 ; and it is only by an infraction of their rule that 

 they have avoided writing Linnaea, Linn. 



No change of rule 15 seems actually required to bring it 

 into unison with the almost universal practice in citation. 

 We have only to understand that genera adopted by Linnseus 

 from Tournefort, etc., and so accredited, should continue to 

 be thus cited ; that the date 1737 (Linnaeus, " Genera," ed. 

 1) is, indeed, the point of departure from which to reckon 

 priority, yet that botanical genera began with Tournefort ; so 

 that Tournefortian genera which are accepted date from the 

 year 1700. That is the limit fixed by Linnaeus, and it defi- 

 nitely excludes the herbalists and the ancients whose writings 

 may be consulted for historical elucidation, but not as author- 

 ity for names. 



Upon articles 21 and 22, which give rules for the names 

 of orders and other supra-generic groups, our author offers 

 no new remarks. We venture to offer two. It being the 

 general rule that acem is the proper termination for ordinal 

 names which take their appellation from a typical genus, it 

 is desirable to conform to it as fully as well may be.^ Since 

 Saxifragacem^ Myrsineacece, Styracacece, Gentianacece^ Nyc- 

 taginaceoBy and even Lauracece and Juglandacem were adopted 



1 Cruciferce, Leguminosce, Umhelliferce, Compositce, Lahiatce, and the like, 

 are no exception to the rule, rightly stated, as they are not named from 

 typical genera. We shall not have any more of them, but the old ones 

 in use are among the best. 



