JET. 77.] TO DR. BRITTON. 813 



Sunday Evening, November 27, 1887. 



DEAK DK. BRITTON, I wish to call your attention 

 either in a personal way or in the " Bulletin," if pre- 

 ferred, to a name coined by you on the 223d page of 

 this year's " Bulletin." 



" Conioselinum bipinnatum (Walter, Fl. Car. under 

 Apium), Britton, Selinum Canadense, Michx., 1803." 



I want to liberate my mind by insisting that the 

 process adopted violates the rules of nomenclature by 

 giving a superfluous name to a plant, and also that in 

 all reasonable probability your name is an incorrect 

 one. 



Take the second point first. On glancing at the 

 " Flora of North America," of Torrey and Gray, 1, 

 619, where the name Conioselinum Canadense legiti- 

 mately came in, you will notice that the name Apium 

 bipinnatum, Walt., is not cited as a synonym ; also 

 that the synonymous name of Cnidium Canadense, 

 Spreng., is cited with " excl. Syn." This Apium bi- 

 pinnatum, Walt., you might gather was one referred 

 to. Sufficient reason for the exclusion by Dr. Torrey 

 might have been that Michaux's plant is a cold north- 

 ern one, which nobody would expect in or near Wal- 

 ter's ground the low and low middle part of Carolina. 

 Besides, the preface of that "Flora" states that 

 Walter's herbarium had meanwhile been inspected by 

 Dr. Torrey 's colleague, who may now add that the 

 Apium bipinnatum is not there. So that the name 

 you adopt rests wholly upon a mere guess of Spren- 

 gel's, copied by De Candolle, dropped on good grounds 

 by Torrey, but inadvertently reproduced in Watson's 

 " Index," copying De Candolle. I suppose you would 

 not contend that a wholly unauthenticated and dubi- 

 ous (I might say, doubtless mistaken) name, under 



