354 Cook : NOMENCLATURE OF THE ROYAL PALMS 
garded the above history and relied entirely upon the finding in 
Sprengel’s herbarium of a specimen of the Porto Rican royal palm 
erroneously identified as Euterpe caribaca.* They do not, how- 
ever, give any reason for believing that Sprengel had this specimen 
in hand or in mind while revising the Systema, and there are sev- 
eral points of internal evidence which forbid such a supposition. 
The name caridaea was not proposed for a new species ; the name 
for which it was substituted being given at the end of the descrip- 
tion ‘(Areca oleracea Jacq.).” There is no mention of Porto 
Rico, the only locality given being that of Jacquin, ‘‘ /ws. Carib.” 
a term which seems not to have included Porto Rico, Jamaica and 
the other larger Antilles, which were frequently mentioned by 
name. Sprengel shows care and discrimination in the indication 
of localities, and wrote ‘ Jud. occ.’ and “ Jus. Antill. minor” 
when plants were known from different islands of the West Indies. 
Finally the description of Euterpe caribaea definitely excludes the 
royal palm of Porto Rico by stating that the fruit is somewhat 
curved, “‘fructibus oblongis subincurvis,” a peculiarity mentioned by 
Jacquin in the same words, and known to exist only in the royal 
palm of the southern islands of the lesser Antilles.+ 
With these facts in view it seems apparent that the discovery 
of Sprengel’s mislabeled specimen does not bring his Euterpe cart- 
baea any nearer to Porto Rico than before, nor does it alter three- 
quarters of a century of botanical history in which this name has 
remained in oblivion as a synonym of Oreodoxa oleracea, a period 
of disuse which under a consistent application of the Berlin fifty 
year rule would have rendered its resuscitation impossible, what- 
ever its original merits. 
* The Caribbean royal palm, Roystonea oleracea, formerly called Oreodoxa oleracea, 
has been reported from Porto Rico more than once, but its occurrence is not authenti- 
cated. The Porto Rican specimens distributed from Berlin as Oreodoxw oleracea (Sin- 
tenis 20. 7525), stated to have been identified by Professor Drude, do not sci fo 
this genus, but ie skegi Acrista monticola. 
tanists may hold that Sprengel should be followed in changing the name 
of Jean s wera on the ground that the Brazilian oleracea of Martius had pri 
asa s of Euterpe, but if the name caribaea is to be taken away from Jacquin’s 
oleracea ny the Carib Islands and used for the royal palm of Porto Rico (to — 
oringuena ), it is evident that the older and more southern species would still 
need of a name, so that even the motive of economy is lacking as a justification for ine 
arbitrary change proposed at Berlin. 
