204 PITTONIA. 
it is credited to Dillenius. In the Illustrated Flora it is at- 
tributed to Linneus. Consulting Linneus we find the 
authors of the last-named work in error, and those of the 
former correct. Linnsus neither proposed nor claimed as 
his the genus in question. He simply adopted it from 
Dillenius, and he distinctly credits it wholly to that cele- 
brated cotemporary of his. To Dillenius, therefore, we are 
obliged to appeal, if we are to learn what is the type of the 
modern Draba. Consulting his pages in the Nova Plan- 
tarum Genera, published in 1819, we perceive that he estab- 
lished it upon four species, all taken out of the Alyssum of 
Tournefort; the essential generic character being found in 
the rosaceous or alsinaceous aspect of the corolla, each petal 
of which is bifid, so that the flower is not obviously cruci- 
form as it is in Alyssum, but rather resembles that of a 
Stellaria or a Cerastium. Had this author gone no further, 
we should have been able to make out his type, or types, 
from Tournefort alone. But he saved posterity that labor, 
by enumerating four species as certainly of this genus, 
adding as doubtful a number 5. 
I have not deemed it worth while to identify his fifth 
and doubtful Draba. I leave that to the advocates of the 
absurdest of all nomenclatorial subterfuges, the doctrine of 
“residues.” The four which he enumerates as positive 
Draba species are, in modern binary nomenclature, these : 
1. Erophila verna, DC. 
2. Draba Caroliniana, Walt. 
3. Petrocallis Pyreneica, R. Br. 
4. Berteroa incana, DC. 
This represents the Dillenian succession and numbering 
of Draba species; and not only does D. verna stand first; 
