June 3, 1908 41 
THE WASHINGTON PALMS 
By WILLIS L. JEPSON 
In the Botanical Gazette for December, 1907, Mr. S. B. 
Parish gives the results of his careful and able investigations of 
the Washington Palms, which makes interesting reading. Va-, 
rious names for this genus and for the native Californian species» -~__ 
appeared at early dates in seed catalogues of tradesmen. In re- 
taining the name Washingtonza for the genus Mr. Parish justly 
says that “‘to seek in a tradesman’s catalogue for a pretext for 
displacing an established name requires a lust for change almost 
amounting to a mania,” and aptly adds, furthermore, that» the 
code of nomenclature “should not be interpreted in the interest 
of novelty.” 
He restricts the name W. flifera Wendland, to forms with 
the petiole unarmed near the blade, and determines that W. ro- 
busta Wendland is a variety of it with the petioles wholly armed. 
The trees in the California gardens with few or no filaments to 
the blade, hitherto called W. robusta by Californian authors, 
and doubtless indigenous to northern Lower California, he de- 
scribes under the new name W. gracilis. Cultivated trees on 
the Riviera are accepted as true Washingtonia filifera Wend- 
land. ‘The author apparently refers all wild trees on the Colo- 
rado desert to W. filifera var. robusta, although he concedes 
that some trees at Palin Springs show leaves unarmed near the 
blade. 
All the above species have the petiole accumulately pro- 
longed in the blade. The third species of the genus, viz. W. 
Sonorae Watson, native of Sonora and Lower California, has 
the petiole obtuse at its junction with the blade. 
The paper contains many fine photographs, not only show- 
ing habit of the tree, but detail structure of the leaves, panicles, 
fruit and seeds. In connection with the author’s statement that 
these palms support no parasitic fungus, it may be noted that a 
fungoid parasite has been found on trees at National City, Cali- 
fornia, by one of my students, Mr. C. N. Forbes. 
