1006 



grading in attention to nomenclature as well as in too many other 

 respects also. Whatever may have been the relative position of the 

 two Societies some years ago, that of London has since most assuredly 

 left the other far behind in carrying out the purposes for which they 

 were understood to be originally instituted. 



The appearance of the censure quoted in the above passage from 

 the ' Phytologist,' has not lessened a wish which I had long since felt, 

 of making public record of some circumstances which might assist 

 botanists in forming a proper estimate of the degree of trust or distrust 

 to be given to the labels issued with specimens from the Botanical 

 Society of London. This institution may now be deemed the grand 

 centre from which the herbaria of British botanists are supplied with 

 such specimens as the individual possessors or collectors of herbaria 

 cannot readily procure for themselves. Among upwards of two hun- 

 dred members we now find many of the most active field collectors 

 and best practical botanists of Britain. Their duplicate specimens 

 are sent to London as a central depot, whence they are again promptly 

 distributed among the individual members in England and foreign 

 botanists, according to the requirements of each. Many thousands 

 of labelled specimens are thus distributed from London each year, in 

 the name of the Society. Much influence, whether for good or for 

 mischief, must thus be exercised over those departments of botanical 

 science in which accuracy of nomenclature is an essential matter; for 

 example, among others, in the publication of local lists, or of special 

 localities for plants. 



Of the London Society's doings during the few first years of its in- 

 stituted existence, say from 1836 to 1840, I know very little ; although 

 enabled to form legitimate guesses or inferences thereanent, from cir- 

 cumstances which have subsequently come within my knowledge. 

 Under a mistaken idea that sufficient reliance might be placed upon 

 the good faith and public pledges of those who were assuming the 

 management of the Botanical Society of Edinburgh, I became an 

 early member of that Society ; while the association of a few tyros, 

 under the pretending title of " Botanical Society of London," appeared 

 to presage only an abortive effort and short existence. Subsequently, 

 however, I was induced to join the London Society also; although 

 at first only with the design of assisting its objects by one additional 

 subscription, and without any thought of actively interfering in the 

 management. 



But as it soon become too evident that the Edinburgh Society 

 would not be worked for the general benefit of its members, and would 



