XXXll FLORA ORCADENSIS. 
as the description of plants—new varieties at least 
—are not to be found there, but in inaccessible—to 
me at least— botanical journals, I could not follow 
it absolutely. JI have to a greater extent laid the 
“Manual of British Botany,’ 9th edition, by Professor 
Babington, under contribution, and followed it more 
closely than any other work. Sir J. D. Hooker's 
“ Student’s Flora,” 5rd edition; Bentham and Hooker's 
“Flora,’ Sth edition; and Edmonston’s Ist and 2nd 
editions of the “ Flora of Shetland” have been fre- 
quently referred to. Col. H. H. Johnston, D.Se,, 
C.B., F.L.S., published a valuable contribution in the 
“Annals of Natural History of Seotland” in 1895, 
from which a few species, especially of Hveracia, 
have been taken, which form an interesting addition. 
I have given the common names of plants, which 
have been taken principally from the “ Botanist’s 
Pocket Book.” 6th edition, by W. R. Hayward, as 
well as the scientific. The question has often been 
asked me, “Why do you use scientific names, when 
common, easily-remembered ones would suit as well ?” 
Well, the difficulty is with the common names. 
Many people use the same term for plants which 
are quite different. Take ‘“gowans,” for example. I 
have heard people apply the same term to three 
different plants. Then “smerows” is the name 
applied by some to Lotus corniculatus, by others 
to Trifolium repens. My John Spence tells me that 
in the Hillside, Birsay, it is applied to the latter ; 
whilst in the neighbouring district of Beaquoy it 
is used for the former. Common names, owing to 
their indefinite application, had to be given up. I 
