Bibliographical Notices. 1 23 



and publisher to make a handsome, not a portable volume ; for had 

 his views corresponded Avith those of the author in this respect, the 

 work might have been made much more useful, because smaller. 

 Condensation in the printing has clearly been neglected. 



The species are arranged in their natural orders, but the generic 

 characters are removed from them and formed into a Linnsean 

 synopsis of genera. Such a synopsis is highly useful, but we think 

 that the work would have been more convenient if these characters 

 had been placed at the head of each natural order, and the Linnoean 

 synopsis I'educed to the smallest possible limits. 



The introduction contains some valuable remarks upon terminology, 

 recommending new or restricted uses of words, in many of which we 

 concur, but cannot do so in all cases ; for instance, it seems most 

 undesirable to use the term elliptic for a figure which is acute at 

 both ends, and not for the mathematical figure so called, for it can 

 only create confusion. If elliptic is to be used at all, it must be 

 looked upon as the same as oval. We also consider " triangular " 

 to be the correct term for a " form nearly triangular, where the stalk 

 is attached to oue of the sides," but cannot agree with Mr. Woods in 

 using deltoid "where the insertion of the stalk also forms an angle, 

 but where the upper and lower parts of the leaf are very unequal :" — 

 deltoid must be held to mean ' like the Greek A', and therefore nearly 

 the same as triangidar, when applied to the outline of a thin leaf. 

 The term deltoid, we believe, is chiefly used in the description of 

 thick-leaved plants, and then describes the form of a transverse section 

 of the leaf. The new term haft, denominating a " leaf-stalk accom- 

 panied by a membranous margin," is excellent, and will doubtless be 

 generally adopted in English books ; not ^o joining, used by our author 

 for the node of other botanists, ^om^ being by him restricted, as it 

 ought to be, to the inter node. " When of two parts, each measured 

 from its own extremities, the dimensions are equal, I have used that 

 term ; but it not unfrequently happens, by the position of the parts, 

 that the shorter may extend as far, or farther, than the longer. In 

 that case it is equalling or exceeding.'" This is an excellent distinc- 

 tion. 



In noticing such works as the present, it is scarcely possible to do 

 more than make a few remarks similar to the above, for a review is 

 not the place for discussing the distinctness of species or the value of 

 characters : on the former we will only remark, that our author has 

 acknowledged many more species than we had expected ; and of the 

 latter, that we generally agree with him in his judgement upon them. 



Very few new species are introduced, and the nomenclature is usually 

 that of the works in common use in this and other countries, but the 

 omission of any reference to authorities for the names renders it in 

 some cases difficult to determine to what plants of other writers our 

 author refers. Our attention has been di-awn to a new and much- 

 improved arrangement of Atriplex, in which the A. patula of Smith 

 becomes A. hastata, A. prostrata \% A. triangularis, ^Ir. Babington's 

 A. rosea is changed into A. Babingtonii, and the English A. laciniata 

 into A. arenaria, the latter two names being new ones required bv 



9* 



