AGAINST BEVERTIBLE NAMES. 193 



well of this ; 



fully 



satisfied me tliat it is a good genus, though it has a very close 

 ally in Calycoseris, Gray. 



1. N. Oalifornica. Bafiiiesqnia Califoniica^ Nutt. Am. 

 l^bil. Soc. 1. c; Gray, Syn. Fl. 415. 



2. N. Neo-Mexicana. Eafinesquia Neo-3Iexicana, Gray, 

 PI. Wright, ii. 103 (1853), Greene, Pitt. i. 291. 



TU31I0X. 



Rafinesque, Amenities of Nature, 63 (1810). Torreya, 

 Arnott; Ann. Nat. Hist. i. 126 (1838), not of Eaton (1833), 

 nor of Sprengel (1821), nor of Rafinesque (1817 & 1818). 

 Caryotaxus, Zucc; Henk. & Hochst. Nadelh. 365 (1865). 

 Fce/atoa:us Nelson (as Senilis), Pinacese, 167 (1866). . 



The following, from the . pen of the late Dr. Gray, is as 

 graceful a verbal tribute as has been paid to the memory of 

 any American botanist : " All round the world, Torreya 

 iaxlfoUa, Torreya Ccdifornica, Torreya micifera and Tor- 

 reya grandis—as well as his own important contributions to 

 botany, of . which they are a memorial— should keep our 

 associate's memory as green as their own perpetual verdure.'" 

 . Tlie generic name Torreya for now more than fifty yecarg 

 has been applied continuously to a beautiful genus of tax- 

 aceous trees ; and at this moment it is an unwelcome task to 

 point out as inadmissable this use of the name. But it 

 is perfectly clear, and should have been so to every author 

 who has been concerned, that this genus never for a moment 

 had any just claim to the name. Waiving, therefore, all 

 consideration of the final revertibility of the appellation 

 Torreya, and granting its availability for the earliest unques- 

 tioned genus to which it was applied, that genns is Nutta 1 s 

 Synandra, over which Rafinesque's second Torreya holds 

 something near a y ear|s_priority ^ It is t herefore^ mcontro- 



^' A. Gray, Proc. Am. Acad. ix. 271. 



