414 PROCEEDINGS OF SECTIOX D. 



3._B0TA^'ICAL NOME>X'LATURE WITH SPbX'IAL 

 REFERENCE TO THE FUNGI. 



Bij D. IIcALPINE. 



In compiling a systematic census of the Australian fungi, now 

 being issued by the Department uf Agriculture, Victoria, I found 

 it necessary to set clearly before my mind the pritjciple on which 

 the naming was to be conducted. There is a good deal of con- 

 fusion existing in this, as in other departments of botany, and I 

 wished to avoid anything which would tend to make "• confusion 

 worse confounded." Accordingly the subject of botanical nomen- 

 clature with reference to the fungi Avas carefiilh^ thought out and 

 a definite mode of naming adopted. 



The first point considered was — Whnt is the object in view in 

 giving a special name to any plant ? Generally speaking, it is to 

 enable anyone conversant with the subject to readily recognise the 

 particular plant intended by the author of the name. The name is 

 not given to magnify the author of it nor for his convenience, but 

 to serve the interests of the science. It is understood that the 

 binomial system of nomenclature is strictly followed, that every 

 plant has a generic and a specific name, the whole being considered 

 as one, and the name of the author who first described it is appended 

 — usually in an abbreviated form. Since the binomial system was 

 first definitely adopted by Linnaeus the authority for any name 

 does not go beyond his time, and the one who first adopted any 

 pre-Linnaean genus and used it with a specific name would be 

 regarded as the author of that name. 



It is comparativelv easy to settle that every plant must have a 

 generic and a specific name, but when several names have been 

 given to the same plant by different authors, which one shall be 

 chosen ? To guide us here the most important principle or rule 

 adopted by the congress of botanists, held at Paris in 1867, under 

 the presidency of M. Alphonse de Caudolle, was that of " priority 

 of publication," meaning that a plant shall be known under the 

 name first applied to it by its original describer, provided that the 

 genus in which it was originally placed is still retained. This is a 

 perfectly reasonable arrangement when qualified, as all rules must 

 be, by common sense and the nature of the case. Thus names 

 exist for the convenience of the science and not to gratify the 

 whims of any individual, so that where the strict application of 

 this law of priority of publication would upset well-established 

 names and give no corresponding advantage — would merely, in 

 fact, conform to the rule while creating confusion — then no change 

 of name is necessary or desirable. The principle of "■ priority of 

 jjublication " I have followed with the qualifications laid down. 



The application of this principle is sometimes rendered difficult 

 Avhen the generic and specific name of a plant are considered in- 

 dependently. Each is only half a name and the part must not be 



