22 
broad-leaved, smooth, clammy Campion”’ were in use before the 
time of Linnzus. She then made a few remarks on Linnzus’s 
principles of naming, remarking that he made no attempt at 
identification of the classical names and stereotyped the blunders 
of a loose tradition, but that, nevertheless, literary criticism is 
here beside the mark, and, similarly, scientific criticism is not 
applicable to popular names. Miss Garlick fully admitted the 
inaccuracy and looseness of popular naming, and gave as examples 
the tea shrub, so called because 200 years ago, the label of a true 
tea plant and that of a Barbary thorn were accidentally exchanged ; 
the Nasturtium, which has lost its old name of Indian-cress, and 
taken its later name from water-cress; and also the incongruous 
list of roses, including that of Jericho. Many other errors, she 
said, might be instanced, but they do not affect the value of the 
popular name, for it is needed and answers its purpose. 
She regretted the use of many home-grown names and the — 
tendency to replace them by the scientific generic name, 
with no gain in accuracy and much loss in association. For 
instance, Digitalis for Foxglove, Antirrhinium for Snapdragon, 
Delphinium for Larkspur, and Gladiolus for Corn Flag. As argu- 
ments in favour of the use of popular flower names she pointed 
out their close connection with our history, both religious and 
social, as well as with the history of medical treatment; and to 
illustrate their use in the poets she quoted the passage describing 
love-in-idleness in ‘‘ A Midsummer Night’s Dream,” and the des- 
_cription of a cottage garden in Matthew Arnold’s “ Thyrsis.” 
To show the etymological interest of the names themselves, she 
traced back that of Gilliflower (Marie Antoinette’s Julienne) through 
a genealogy of aromatics to its Greek origin (xapydpvAdov) and 
identified Celery by means of the description of Calypso’s garden 
in the Odyssey and the leaf on the coin of Selinus with Selinon, 
part of the compound word which gives us Parsley. 
The following exhibits were shown :—A series of Silurian 
graptolites by Mrs. Park; a flying-fish (Dactylopterus ortentalis)~ — 
by Mr. J. E. Whiting ; and the ephyra-stage of the common Jelly- 
fish (Aurelia aurita) by Dr. J. W. Williams. With regard to this 
last exhibit, Dr. Williams showed, by means of drawings and 
blackboard sketches, how jellyfish were evolved from sea-anemones, 
and, when properly used, what a help Haeckel’s fundamental 
biogenetic law “ that the history of the individual is an epitome™ 
of the history of the race’’ was in solving the problem of the 
genesis of animals. 
_ Friday, March 11th, 1904. Mr. A. W. Stokes, F.1.C., F.CS.,  - 
in the chair. . : 
