453 
3rdly, A general work by Mr. Persoon, on Fungy, 
some sheets of which he has sent me, promises to 
be so important, that I wish to see it complete be- 
fore I digest the British Fungi into order. Whatever 
reasons therefore might occasion the first delay, 
these, which are analogous to what you supposed, 
make me hope the public will in the end have no 
reason to complain of it. A still further advantage 
will accrue from my having the benefit of two sea- 
sons more (the spring of 1800 and 1801) to inves- 
tigate the difficult genus Salix, which I have already 
written twice over, and in which the work will be 
more likely to merit the praise of labour and ori- 
ginality, than perhaps in any other part, though it 
will still contain only an imperfect sketch of the 
subject. . , 
I proceed to notice some of your remarks. The 
order of Syngenesia Monogymia appears not to be 
founded in nature, nor useful in practice, because 
some Gentiane, Viole and Lobelieé have the an- 
thers perfectly united, others not at all. I have 
more to say on this subject than can be admitted 
here. 
The genus of Potamogeton I am aware is but 
imperfectly treated. I have more than one new 
British species. 
As to changing names,—Fadiola millegrana is no 
“arbitrary alteration,” or novelty, but the old ge- 
neric name of Ray, retained as a specific one, and 
surely preferable to /inmozdes, which I have proved 
to be false. My Stlene inflata would certainly have 
been called S. Behen, had there not been another 
already so called in Linneus. In the specific 
