alee 
in particular Willdenow, Gmelin, Schmidel and Persoon, added new spe- 
cies to the genus, and especially such rusts as had teleutospores of a simi- 
‘lar shape, whether haying one, two or many cells. These additions so 
overshadowed the original Juniper rust and its allies that the genus came 
to stand for these more abundant and more characteristic rusts. After a 
time there were gradually separated the one-celled forms, as Cwomurus, 
almost at once changed to Uromyces, the many-celled forms, as Phrag- 
midium, and the forms with a gelatinous spore-bed, as Gymnosporangium, 
leaying the common two-celled forms under the old name Puccinia. We 
are now asked to restore the name Puccinia to its original use, although 
its misuse has extended over a full century. 
The generic name of Dicwoma, which was first distinctively applied to 
the ordinary two-celled forms, appears to have been introduced by Nees 
von Hsenbeck in 1816 as the name of a section, and was erected into a 
distinct genus by S. F. Gray in 1821. But it never came into general use, 
and soon disappeared from current books entirely. Of the rusts usually 
listed under Puccinia, there are forty-seven species in the Indiana flora, 
which are now to be transferred to Dicwoma. 
The case of the third genus, Uromyces, embracing the one-celled rusts, 
is simpler but quite as annoying. The genus was named by Link in 1809; 
but not finding the name to his liking, he rechristened the genus seven 
years afterward, and now after all these years we are called upon to 
readopt the earlier name, dropping the name Uromyces, and to transfer 
our species to Cwomurus. For it was held by DeCandolle long ago that 
“an author, who has first established a name, has himself no more right 
than any one else to change it for the simple reason of impropriety,” and 
recent rulings have held the opinion to be sound. 
So it comes about that the names of the four largest genera of rusts 
must be changed, to make them conform to the law of priority, after 
having been in use almost from the first, and one of these changes is a 
transfer, which necessarily will cause some subsequent confusion. There 
appears but one question yet to be answered. We must know whether a 
thorough inspection of the literature will substantiate the claim that these 
are in fact the genuine first names for the genera. Feeling considerable 
confidence in the present conclusion, I here rewrite the Indiana list of 
Uredinee, to more clearly call attention to the proposed and doubtless in- 
evitable changes. 
12—ScIENCR. 
