CONCERNING THE CITATION OF AUTHORS. 233 
whether by name or definition. The enterprise was great. 
The need of such a work, summing up all the known genera, 
was pressing. Had they attempted to enumerate the species 
under each genus, the close of the current century would not 
have seen the work completed. The proper characterization 
and right naming of all the thousands of species in all the 
genera, a piece of work almost incaleulably great, was left, 
necessarily, to other hands. But the crediting of Benth. & 
Hook. f. with species, which they purposely let alone, pre- 
supposes that the men who accomplish this great work must 
freely hand over to those authors the credit of their own toil ; 
a manifest absurdity. For an illustration of the way in which 
authors of a Genera Plantarum are obliged, for want of time, 
to avoid the whole matter of specifie nomenclature, let any 
one consult page 38 of the eighth volume of Baillon's Histoire. 
Among several genera which this celebrated author would 
reduce to Hysterionica there is Grindelia ; but his page 
exhibits a figure of the plant known to us in America as our 
Grindelia squarrosa. Sines the author will include in Hys- 
terionica not only Chrysopsis and Aplopappus, each with 
many species long since named, but several more, a question 
arises as to whether the specific name squarrosa which this 
Grindelia bears, can be adopted in Hysterionica, or whether 
there may not be an older squarrosa in A plopappus or some- 
where else, which will rule it out. By taking time enough he 
can decide the matter; and since, on account of the figure on 
his page, he must indicate what plant is represented, he perhaps 
ought to go into the specific nomenclature of his Hysterionica- 
far enough to settle the question. But he will not. He is not 
naming species. He is discussing genera; so over his figure 
he prints “ Hysterionica (Grindelia squarrosa)", which, be- 
“that species of H; ysterionica, whatever - 
its name may be under that genus, which men have hitherto 
known as Grindelia squarrosa.” Bentham and Hooker, 
figuring no species, have largely avoided what has been Bail- 
lon’s frequent necessity, of touching specific nomenclature ; 
and the former have in so far abjured all needless mention of 
ing interpreted is: 
