SOURCE OF THE ILLUSTRATIONS USED IN 

 THE PRECEDING ARTICLE. 



Fig. 236, Phallus iudusiatus, Photograph made in Samoa. 



Fig. 237, Phallus impudicus, Photograph made in France. 



Fig. 238, Phallus rugulosus, Illustration by Professor Yasuda. 



Fig. 239, Phallus tenuis, From drawing by Professor Kusano. 



Fig. 240, Mutinus boninensis, From drawing by Professor Kusano. 



Fig. 241, Lysurus Mokusin, Photographed at Paris. 



Fig. 242, Laternea bicolumnata, From photograph by Professor Kusano. 



HEWING TO THE LINE. 



Outside of the domain of pure fiction, I believe there is no sub- 

 ject in which the literature contains such a small proportion of truth 

 as does that of mycology. Under the present system of using plant 

 names for advertising purposes, there has developed a class of writ- 

 ers who apparently do not have the slightest regard for the truth of 

 the subject, if they can advance some pretext for getting up new 

 names or new combinations to which to affix their own. In fact, 

 much of the so-called mycological literature would better be called 

 mythological. We have made a vigorous war on this situation since 

 it has become apparent to us, and we are glad to see that others are 

 coming to our aid. 



In Ceylon an interesting article has just appeared by Mr. Fetch, 

 entitled "Revision of Ceylon Fungi." Mr. Fetch handles the sub- 

 ject without gloves, and if the article were not so long we should 

 be glad to reproduce it in full. We can not refrain from quoting a 

 single sentence to give an idea of the vigorous way in which the 

 subject is handled. When mycologists begin to tell the truth about 

 things in good plain English there is hope for the future. It is in 

 my opinion better to call a spade a spade than to call it a "pala," 

 hoping your readers will not recognize it. 



"Berkeley's Ceylon species and genera have been written about 

 on several occasions, and the names have been subjected to the us- 

 ual changes, sometimes after an examination of his specimens, but 

 more often without. In consequence, the reduction of his species 

 to synonyms, after an examination of the original specimens and 

 drawings, and a comparison of these with fresh specimens, intro- 

 duces rather curious results. For example, Berkeley "described" 

 the same fungus three times as Psalliota trachodes, Psalliota pedilia, 

 and Psalliota poderes. Saccardo leaves the first in Psalliota, but 

 puts the other two in Chitonia, while Hennings later leaves the 

 first two in Psalliota and Chitonia respectively, but institutes a new 

 genus, Chitoniella, for the third. Yet there is only one species! 

 In connection with this name-changing, it may be pointed out that 

 it is hardly fair, when Berkeley wrote Agaricus (L/epiota) rubricatus 

 B. & Br. to obtain an advertisement by writing Lepiota rubricata." 



406 



