REVIEWS AND CRITICISMS. 123 
notoriously abounds in errors of all sorts, and a painstaking 
bibliographer would soon find that out for himself. 
The most serviceable, and therefore the kindliest office of 
a reviewer, I take to be that of calling attention to a book’s 
defects; and I have dwelt so long on these, in this instance, 
that the good things that might be said of even the biblio- 
graphical and nomenclatorial pages, must be left unspoken 
by me; save as they were expressed in the opening para- 
graphs, and as I here add in conclusion, that in point of 
usefulness to those who know how to use, without abusing a 
book that should be a standard, Professor MacMillan’s volume 
will inevitably take, and probably for some time hold, the 
first place among American publications of its kind. 
Epw. L. GREENE. 
On Legitimate Authorship of Certain Binomials, with other 
Notes on Nomenclature. By Guo. B. Supworts, Bull. 
Torr. Club, xx, 40-46. 
Under the above title it is contended that manuscript 
names subsequently published by other than their originators 
should not be credited to their authors but to those who first 
published them with diagnoses. Mr. Sudworth takes up the 
names of various North American trees, the first considered 
being that of Pinus ponderosa, one of our Western pines. 
It was so named by Douglas, and the binomial first appeared 
in that travelers’ journal, published in Hooker’s Companion 
to the Botanical Magazine. The species was afterwards 
characterized by Loudon in the Arboretum, who appended 
“Douglas” to Pinus ponderosa,” as Douglas left only a written 
label accompanying his specimens deposited in the her- 
barium of the Loudon Horticultural Society. “Strictly there- 
fore,” says our writer, “the name shuuld be written, ‘P. 
ponderosa, Loudon.’ ” 
It seems not to have occurred to Mr. Sudworth that what 
one does through another he does himself, and that the 
author of a species and the publisher of the same may be two 
different persons. Loudon in crediting the species to Douglas 
