DE S. -F. GRAY 33 



Note L. 



« The Camp, Sunningdale, Jan. 2"^^ 1893. — Dear Mr. Le 

 Jolis — You ask me the question, who should be cited as 

 author of the generic names of the Hepaticse proposed by S. F. 

 Gray in his « Natural Arrangement of Brit. plants » : I unhesi- 

 tatingly answer S. F. Gray. — It is true that S. F. Gray acknow- 

 ledges having received assistance from various botanists in the 

 préparation of that work, but he takes the responsibility of the 

 whole, and not one of thèse botanists hsis clciimed the author- 

 ship of any of the gênera estahlished init. —In 1861 S. F. 

 Gray's son J. E. Gray, not till 40 years after the publication of 

 his father's work (1821), and 25 years after his death (1836), 

 claims for himself the sole authority of the Systematic part of 

 that work : that is of ail that is valuable in it, thus accusinghis 

 father of having appropriated his labors, and of having imposed 

 upon the public. — When it is considered that this accusation 

 was witheld until so many years after his father's death; that is, 

 till neither the latter nor his friends could be appealed to 

 for explanation or justification, I think it will be admitted that 

 the accuser has put himself « out of court », and that his claim 

 should not be entertained. If it is true, the respect due to a fa- 

 ther's memory should hâve imposed silence on the son ; if false, 

 so much the worse. — I knowof no reason for assuming that 

 S. F. Gray was not compétent to hâve characterised the well 

 recognized groups of the old genus Jungermannia, and to 

 hâve invented names for them ; no profound knowledge or 

 great ability was required for this ; and that he had repute as 

 a Botanist is evidenced by his having been employed by the 

 Editor of « Thomson's Annals of Philosophy », to Write an arti- 

 cle on Botany for that work. [vol. XVI (1820) 115-130.] — For 

 my own part I do not think that the subject is worth pursuing 

 further. Ifit isthe case that aBennett proposed or describedthe 

 Gênera of Hepaticae for the « Nat. arr. of Br. pi. », this was done 

 for, and the resuit given to S. F. Gray for his own use; behind 

 thiswo cannotgo. I may addthat J. E. Gray was a friend of my 

 father's and of my own of many years standing, and that 

 whilst entertaining a high regard for his many estimable quali- 

 ties, we could not but regret his habit of making assertiona 



3 



