1839] 



FARMERS' REGISTER, 



621 



Rabbits food clover — Trifolium nrvense 

 Marsh marygold — Caltha palustrc 

 and many others which have definite common 

 names, and common names which are the same 

 in all parts ofthe country. In connexion wilh this 

 subject however, I must remark, that all plants are 

 not filled for such a use. A very large cla?s of 

 plants seem to grow almost equally well in almost 

 all kinds'of soil. In noticing what is technically 

 termed "habitat" of a plant botanists very fre- 

 quently mention it as "omnibus locis," i.e. grow- 

 ing in all situation, to all appearance equally well. 

 Tliere is another class of plants, nnach less nume- 

 rous than the first mentioned, which do not thrive 

 except in peculiar soils; — tlwse and thpse only 

 could be used for the purpose of nomenclature. 



Before any regular system of botanic nomencla- 

 ture for soils could be adopted, it would be neces- 

 sary that, we should have a much more extensive 

 and accurate series of observations than has ever 

 yet been made; — And yet perhaps I may safely 

 attempt a commencement, at least enougli to shew 

 ■what is meant. Drawing my information prin- 

 cipally from the 'Essay on Calcareous Manures' 

 I would say, broom grass land i. e. land on which 

 broom-iirass voluntarily sprinss up and flourishes, 

 is naturally unfit for the production of wheat or 

 corn, in consequence of its incapacity to retain 

 putrescent manures. This evil is best corrected 

 by the application of calcareous manures. 



Brook-hme land contains a large portion of cal- 

 careous matter, and is best improved by the im- 

 mediate application of putrescent manures, without 

 any preparatory application of lime or marl. 



Rabbits-foot clover land is for the greater part 

 of the year very dry, whatever may be its appear- 

 ance at the lime when examined, and on this ac- 

 count, though it may produce corn or wheat pretty 

 well, should not be put in grass unless some artifi- 

 cial method of watering can be applied. 



March-marygold land is for the greater part of 

 the year partially covered with water; whatever 

 may be its appearance at the time when examined, 

 and is on this account unfit lor the product'on of 

 any grain or valuable grass unless first improved 

 by drainin<r. 



These instances are sufficient to illustrate my 

 meaning. ICsuch a system could be adopted, it 

 would possess at, least this one advantage; that 

 any farmer after having learned the names of a 

 few plants, would be able to determine the charac- 

 ter ofthe soil which he cultivated without the ap- 

 plication of any chemical tests, or any other exam- 

 ination than such as could at once be made by ihe 

 eye; moreover he would be able to understand 

 and apply with certainty any information which 

 he might obtain Irom the experience of others. 



Chap. XXII. 



TERMINOLOGY OF BOTANY. SCIEXTIFIC ]\ A31ES 

 OF PLANTS, THEIR NATURE AND VALUE AS 

 COMPARED WITH COMMON NAMES. 



" In all the natural sciences it is necessary to 

 express, with the greatest possible brevity and pre- 

 cision, a large number of ideas which are beyond 

 the resources of ordinary language. In ordprthnt 



accuracy and uniformity may be attained in de- 

 scribing natural objects, and that the langutige of 

 scientific writers may be exactly comprehended," 

 we are compelled to resorl lo the use ol' technical 

 lerms. In adopting a technical terminology for 

 a science, two different methods maybe pursued. 

 1st. We may take those words in common use which 

 ap[)roach nearest in meaning to that which is re- 

 quired, and giving to them a strict definition, use 

 ihem afterwards in confl-rmity with that dcfiiiiiion. 

 2n(l. We may invent now words, or adopt words 

 from other languages, hrevery instance however 

 we must define our terms, and never lose sight of 

 those definitions. In Ibrmingthe terminology ofbot- 

 any boih of these meihods have been pursued. 

 Those common words which from their nature are 

 definite is their siirnificaiion, such as the numerals, 

 the words opposite, alternate &c. have all been ad- 

 opted without any modification ol meaning, and on 

 that account cannot properly be considered as tech- 

 nical terms. Other common words which have 

 not a very acurately defined meaning, have been 

 adopted after giving to thf>m a technical definiiion. 

 Of this character are the words, hairy, linear, 

 lanceolate &c. Others again, have been tnken 

 from other languages ; principally irom the Latin, 

 and in their adoption, respect has been had in every 

 instance to their original meaning ; — Of this char- 

 acter are the words cordate, renilbrm, auricular, 

 nectary &c. Without going into an exammation 

 ofthe reasons why each of these methods has been 

 adopted, or the extent to which each of them has 

 been pursued, it will be sufficient to remark, that 

 in these ways a terminology has been gradually 

 formed for Botany, which whilst it presents but 

 lew real difficulties to the student, more especially 

 to the student (amiliar with the latin language, it 

 possesses all that acuracy and definiteness which 

 are so essential to scientific language. It is true, 

 that at the outset, the array of technical terms 

 which meets the eye of the tyro in botany, may 

 lead to the belief that in their acquisition he will 

 have difficulties of no common magnitude to over- 

 come, but if he will set about the work in earnest, 

 he will soon find that these difficulties, like many 

 others, "loom largest at a distance." There are 

 not more than forty or fifty technical terms in very 

 common use, and as for the others which occur on- 

 ly occasionally, their meaning can be. learned from 

 any botanical dictionary, when they are met wilh, 

 and need not he placed as a burden on the mernory. 

 Where we have to speak of so great a number 

 of individual objects as are presented in the ve- 

 setable kingdom, it is necessary that we should 

 have some name by which to desitrnate. not each 

 individual, but each species of individuals. These 

 names must not be long, or they will prove very- 

 inconvenient in use ; and yet they must be entirely 

 disiinct from each other, or they will lead to con- 

 fusion, and in either case they will prove a very 

 serious obstacle to the proorress of science. The 

 system of nomenclature now in use amonfr botan- 

 ists is one first proposed by Linnfrus. "Linnasus 

 proposed that the name of every plant shoiilii con- 

 sist of two words; one designating its cenus, the 

 other its species. The first is termed the generic 

 name, and is always a substantive ; the second is 

 the specific name, and is usually an adjective." 

 At the same time *hat he proposed this system of 

 nomenclature, hft srave a number of rules to be ob- 

 sprved in the application of these nnmcs, which 



