1029 



As we do not feel disposed to lengthen this article by entering up- 

 on the discussion of the question of identity of Trichomanes specio- 

 sum, &c., we will now proceed to analyze what we cannot but look 

 upon as an unfair attempt on the part of the editor, to fix upon Mr. 

 Newman the intention of appropriating the authorship of genera to 

 which he had no claim. At the end of the first paragraph of the foot- 

 note quoted above, and so far removed fi'om any obseiTations to 

 which it could with propriety belong, as to have the appearance of 

 an afterthought — a capital hit, too good to be lost, — will be found the 

 following passage. " Let it be observed that Mr. Newman gives no 

 authority for the genera Polystichum and Lastrgea in his Synoptical 

 Table of British Ferns, p. 6, but he informs us (p. 8) that these " have 

 not been employed by any previous writer on the British Ferns." — 

 Now, looking on this passage as it stands here, we ask, would not any 

 one understand it as implying that Mr. Newman thereby intended to 

 appropriate to himself the honour of founding these two genera } On 

 turning however to the page indicated (in the 1st edition, though not 

 so stated by the editor) we were grieved to find a most paljDable in- 

 stance of suppressio vert — of stating the truth, but not the tvhole 

 truth — which we must consider somewhat uncandid, to say the least 

 of it. The whole passage, fairly quoted, is this. " The name follow- 

 ing the genus is that of a British [so in the original] author who has 

 employed it. The genera, for which no authority is given, have not 

 been employed by any previous writer on the British Ferns. The 

 works in which the genera will be found are these," &c., followed by 

 the names of the British authors referred to with the titles of their 

 works. It will be seen that the omission of the first sentence by the 

 editor, materially alters the sense ; and, coupled as this is with his 

 own remarks, so emphatically introduced by " Let it be observed " ! 

 we must suppose that the editor wished it to be understood as every 

 person would be sure to understand it, without referring to the ' His- 

 tory of British Ferns' for the key. We cannot, however, comprehend 

 why Pohstichum and Lastrcea alone should have been selected as ex- 

 amples of Mr. Newman's aptitude for genus-making, seeing that Cys- 

 topteris — the genus immediately preceding the chosen ones — is in 

 the same category, being, like them, without any authority in the Sy- 

 noptical Table. 



We could easily extend these remarks to a much greater length, 

 but by this time our readers must be heartily tired of the subject. 

 Claiming indulgence therefore for a few observations on the last pa- 

 ragraph of the footnote, we will afterwards conclude. 



