basidia, but in the mature specimens no evidence of the attachment can be noted 

 such as is usually very noticeable on basidia-spores. They have more the general 

 'appearance of asci-spores. 5 



HISTORY. The early history of Nidulariaceae, as of all fungi, is vague, 

 owing to the multiplication of names by the early mycologists. There are only 

 three common species in Europe, but Tulasne has shown that they were il- 

 lustrated and described under more than twenty different specific names, and 

 double that number of different combinations. But one real original mono- 

 graph of the subject was ever written, viz: by Tulasne in 1844. When lulasne 

 took hold of the subject all was confusion. He made a careful and thorough 

 study of the structure, established the genera, and selected the best name 

 for the species as they appeared to him. Since this monograph appeared, my 

 cologists in general have shown their appreciation of his work by using his 

 names We have done so in every instance without any juggling whatever. 



When Tulasne wrote his monograph, excepting the three common species 

 of Europe, he had but scanty material, only seventeen collections from foreign 

 lands which he referred to thirteen species. We have studied all of this material 

 (and many times as much more), and we think that Tulasne's species are prac- 

 tically all "good." Since Tulasne's day. sixty years ago, very little additional, 

 systematic work has been done. The usual number of "new species has been 

 added some very good, and some, in our opinion, very bad Miss 

 Violet S. White, a young lady of New York, has recently published (Bull, of 

 the Torrey Club, May, 1902), an account of the American species. It was a 

 good paper (barring the name juggling") and brought out a number of new 

 facts, the most important being the genus Nidula. 



GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION. The species of Nidulariaceae of the 

 temperate world are relatively few, and there are but three common species 

 in Europe, viz: Cyathus striatus. Cyathus vernicosus and Crucibulum vul- 

 gare. In the United States, in addition to these three, we have another common 

 species, Cyathus stercoreus, which is rare in Europe. In Australia, Cyathus verni- 

 cosus, Cyathus stercoreus and Crucibulum vulgare are common, but Cyathus 

 striatus (as far as I know) appears to be wanting. In addition to these common 

 species there are. to my knowledge, only five rare species in Europe and Amer- 

 ica, viz: Nidularia pisiformis, Nidularia Heribaudii, Nidula Candida, Nidula 

 microsperma and Cyathus pygmaeus. We do not include in the above summary 

 (the anomalous genus) Sphaerobolus stellatus, which is fairly common in 

 Europe and America, and probably also in Australia. The species of the re- 

 mainder of the world are relatively scantily known. In the tropics the species 

 appear more numerous, and all different from the temperate region species. 

 From the relatively few collections that are known more species probably 

 have been made than will be maintained when the plants are well known. 1 

 is the experience, I think, of every one that the more material he has the fewer 

 "species" he finds. 



5 I would not have it thought that 1 question the accuracy of Tulasne's statements on the spores 

 of the Nidulariaceae being basidia-spores, for I am not inclined to question Tulasne on subjects con- 

 cerning which I know- nothing. I would only state that they do not appear the same as ordinary basidia- 

 spores. 



6 As a striking example of how easy it is to juggle botanical names, Miss White takes the syn 

 onyms in Tulasne's monograph, and with a date dictionary shuffles up a " new combination for every 

 known species of Nidnlariacete she considers. Tulasne, who did all the work, does not have a single 

 name left. If this juggling was not done with Tulasne's synonyms it could have been in fifteen min- 

 utes' time, but it seems to have been so done for questions of " priority " not explained by Tulasne are 

 not considered in her paper. I do not question but that Miss White acted conscientiously and to the 

 best of the limited light under which she worked. She was young, inexperienced, under bad advisers 

 who ought to know better, and she could not realize at what a low standard such work is generally 

 held ia the mycological world. Since her paper appeared two publications considering the Nidulan- 

 aces have been issued. Saccardo takes recognition of her new genus Nidula, which is really meritor- 

 ious, but completely ignores her other names. Dr. Holl6s, who is i|uite expert himself when it comes 

 to concocting "new combinations" for the purpose of adding " Holl6s" to them, sees no merit in 

 such work when done by another. He trns down every one of Miss White's juggled name. 



