132 GLADIOLUS ILLYRICUS AND ITS ALLIES. 
said to be narrowly winged in G. Z/lyricus, and. broadly so. in com- 
munis, but there appears to me to be no difference between those of 
specimens of the former from Toulon, and the G. communis of our gardens, 
ese three plants therefore seem to be merely subspecies of, one 
superspecies, to which the name communis properly belongs ; and fol- 
lowing the nomenclature adopted in the third edition of ‘ English 
Botany,’ the form called by Koch, and, Godron and Grenier com- 
munis might be distinguished as ex-communis, the others of, course 
retaining the names by which they are already known, E 
It may perhaps be asked, what is the use of this double set of names? 
The answer to this query is, that it is necessary to speak of both the 
including and included groups, and therefore it is well to have a 
name by which to call them. The botanist whose attention is directed 
to the plants of the whole world, and the botanical geógrapher com- 
paring the species of different countries, find. the more comprehensive 
terms most convenient for their purposes ; whilst the monographet and 
the botanist who devotes his attention to the plants of a limited geo- 
graphical area find the necessity of having designation for the subspecies 
or groups of plants, the difference between which is slight though certainly 
existing. Botanical science has arrived at such vast dimensions that it 
is only by a division of labour that real advance can be made ; and each 
section of labourers, though working in concert for a common end, re- 
quires its own special tools, | 
n making comparisons between the number of species in a genus 
or Order in two countries, only one of which has been thoroughly ex- 
plored, it would give a very false idea if we were to take the splitters’ 
species (verspecies plus subspecies) from the latter, and contrast them 
with the species (verspecies plus superspecies) from that country whic 
had not had the benefit of the same minute examination. . If we counted 
Professor Parlatore’s species of Gladiolus, as representing plants having 
the same amount of difference as the species enumerated from the Cape 
of Good Hope, the inequality of the development of the genus 
Gladiolus, as represented in Europe and South Africa, would, appear 
very much less than it really is. 
Careful study shows that there are permanent. hereditary differences 
between plants which have been included by less minute observers 
under a single name, and whatever exists in creation is deserving: of 
attention. Moreover all accurate classification must proceed from indi- 
