152 Muhlenbergia, Volume 3 
hopes that all who have the best interests of American botauy 
at heart will do the same. He is not opposed to Latin descrip- 
tions on general principles, and if the time ever comes when he 
takes up the study of foreign plants, will probably think seri- 
ously of writing Latin descriptions. What we should try to do 
is to €ncourage, not hinder, the sttdy of plants in this vast home 
territory of ours, many parts of which are almost unknown bot- 
anically. Writing about our plants in an alien tongue will not 
advance the work. Although we are now making considerable 
headway as compared with conditions a few years ago, we need 
many more field workers, and they should not be embarassed 
with a foreign language. And has it occurred to you how fool- 
ish itis to be so kind and obliging to foreigners (who passed 
this rtile) while making the work difficult for our own people? 
Some Europeans, especially the Germans, are engaged on works 
like the ‘“Pflanzenreich,” and of course they want things made 
easy. Their educational system is different apparently from 
ours. At least their botanists know more about Latin than do 
ours, and perhaps the study of botany is more restricted there to 
the graduates of the great universities. Latin descriptions sim- 
plify matters for them. ‘That is the whole thing in a nutshell. 
To those who may feel timid about opposing the wishes of for- 
eign botanists, we will say that the wording calls for the describ- 
ing in Latin of “new groups.” ‘That means orders, families, 
genera, etc., for a species is not a “group.” We have had our 
say, and intend to cheerfully continue the writing of descrip- 
ptions in English of American plants for American botanists, or 
for anyone else who can read English. 
