36 ERYTHEA. 



The descriptions wliicL Mr. Coville has given of the new and 

 more critical species, are a valuable element; and almost as 

 much might have been said of the bibliography and synon- 

 ymy, but for a certain complication of parentheses, involving 

 a wide separation of the name of the author of a binomial 

 from the binomial itself. This is not only a flagrant violation 

 of the Paris Code, but becomes an annoyance to those 

 unskilled in matters of bibliography; for they can hardly 

 make out who is the author of a given plant name. 



It seems probable that this system of quoting which the 

 author has invented, may react against the use of the parenthe- 

 sis in citation. The first thing in nomenclature is the binomial 

 itself J and the next thing which one desires to know is, who 

 is the author of it; and this second desideratum is the one 

 which, after Mr. Coville's mode of citation, becomes the most 

 obscure point of all. 



But, after all, bibliography is not the main thing in botany; 

 and the phytography of this good volume is something the 

 worth of which is not likely to be overestimated. Doubtless 

 upon a wider experience in western botany, the author will 

 find a considerable number of his determinations to have 

 been erroneous. But this is the fate of all, even of those 

 who have had much experience in these new fields. 



The twenty-one plates that supplement the text, and 

 represent mostly new species, are done in a style of art 

 unsurpassed in this country. — E. L. G. 



