PRESIDENT S ADDRESS — SECTION D. 159 



tion, which may perhaps be voted upon at our next Congress. If 

 (which personally I do not fear) it should prove that we are substituting 

 two weak sections for a strong one, there would be no difficulty in re- 

 verting to the present arrangement after the experience of, say, two 

 or three meetings. The Zoological and Botanical Sections, if formed, 

 could easily arrange for joint meetings for matters of mutual concern. 



I think, also, that it would immensely popularise and enhance 

 the usefulness of our Association if the papers were deposed from their 

 present importance, or at all events supplemented by pre-organised 

 discussions. For example, in the Botanical Section, it might be an- 

 nounced two years before that there would be a discussion on (a) the 

 occurrence of natural hybrids ; (6) the efiect of the destruction of 

 forests on the flow of streams in Australia. In this way we should 

 get representative Australian scientific opinion on broad Australian 

 scientific subjects in a way which must be of the highest value. We 

 should also feel that we are doing something more than the reading 

 of papers, work that is done very well by local societies. 



Speaking of congresses, let me bring imder your notice the work 

 of the International Congress of Botanists, held at Vienna, 1905. I 

 have brought the matter prominently before the Royal Society of my 

 own State, and the utmost prominence should be given to it in all the 

 States. 



Let me remind you of the modern attempts to evolve laws for a 

 settled nomenclature, beginning at the International Botanical Congress 

 of Paris, 1867. An important congress was held at the International 

 Exhibition of Paris, 1900, at which I was present, when the principle 

 of quinquennial international botanical congresses was established, 

 for the discussion of such matters of nomenclature as might be brought 

 before them. The Paris (1900) Congress did good work, and decided to 

 formulate a code for consideration at the Congress to be held at Vienna 

 in 1905. From 1900 onward, various matters were brought before 

 members, so that, at Vienna, they voted upon points which had been 

 carefully considered beforehand. The result was the promulgation 

 of a code which will go far to secure stability of nomenclature. The 

 work of the Congress includes a list of Australian genera which form 

 the Nomina conservanda which the Congress determined to agree to, 

 irrespective of dates of priority. Vascular cr}^togams and fossil 

 plants remain to be dealt with at the next Congress, to be held at 

 Brussels in 1910. Unfortunately no Australian botanist could be 

 present at the Vienna Congress, but I feel that my brethren will lovally 

 adopt the resolutions of this Congress, representative as it was of the 

 botanists of Europe and America, and adopted as they were by sub- 

 stantial majorities, and, considering that Australian botanists have 

 no principles at stake other than those affecting (and often to a greater 

 extent) their brethren of the northern hemisphere. We have now a 

 tribunal of nomenclature sitting every quinquennium to hear appeals, 

 and its decisions no botanist can afford to disregard. 



I will show presently that grand work has been already done in 

 South Australia in the elucidation of her indigenous plants ; but 



