118 Retrospective Criticism. 



Lancashii-e ? How Dr. Hooker can reconcile himself to call a plant from 

 New South Wales by such a name, being not even of the same genus 

 with the Lancashire asphodel, I am quite at a loss to know. I should 

 have thought Bulbous-rooted Anthericum would have been much more 

 correct. In the next place, in the preface to your Hortus Britunniciis you 

 say that, from the improvements you have introduced in your catalogue, 

 it almost answers the purpose of a Species Plantarum. I certainly have 

 no hesitation in saying that I think it the best catalogue yet published ; but 

 there is a growing evil amongst botanists, or rather those who take upon 

 themselves the work of naming plants, which your improvements do not 

 reach, and from the great increase of the practice, it, in my opinion, 

 threatens great confusion in the nomenclature of plants. I allude to the 

 practice of making use of persons' names for specific names of plants. I 

 like well the idea of noticing particular individuals who have shown them- 

 selves ardent in their pursuits, whether in botany, entomology, or any 

 other subject of natural history, but I think new genera would be much 

 more proper to take advantage of for the purpose ; and, no doubt, oppor- 

 tunities enough occur of new genera in any of the sciences, but more 

 particularly in botany. I make these remarks from (as I have before 

 stated) the increasing practice of complimenting eminent men in this 

 way; and from its tendencj^, according to my views, to introduce unneces- 

 sary difficulties in the study. I am of opinion that specific names ought to 

 be taken from some prominent feature in the plant. I think there are 

 few plants in which some distinct feature may not be found, and an appli- 

 cable specific name agreeing with it. Allow me to mention one individual 

 instance, and I have done. In the same number of the Botanical Magazine 

 I have alluded to before we have Lobeh"« Kraiissi/, which I think has 

 several legible characters about it, such as pedunculata, xylophylloides, 

 or even serrata. If this were more particularly attended to, a good 

 catalogue might then be said to supersede the more elaborate work of a 

 Species Plantarum. But I fear I shall exhaust your patience ; and, instead 

 of the old phrase, multum in j^arvo, being applicable to my epistle, you 

 may think (if I may be allowed the expression without being thought to 

 be an L-ish instead of a Lancashire weaver) that jicirvum in viullo would be 

 much more applicable. I am. Sir, &c. — A Member of the Bury Botanical 

 Society. Bury, Lancashire, N'oi\ 15. 1830. 



Linnaeus, and the genus Valantia. — In glancing oyer your E)2cyclopcEc!ia 

 of Plants, I find an observation under the genus Valantia (p. 862.) which 

 must be considered a satire, and in my opinion an undeserved one, on 

 the memory of Linnaeus. I am willing, however, to believe that j'ou have 

 published it under the impression of its correctness, and that you would 

 be pleased, rather than offended, if it could be proved to your satisfaction 

 to be incorrect. It is under this impression that I send you the following 

 observations : — 



The passage in the Encyclojjcedia to which I allude is this : — " The 

 author of the name would have employed his time better in considering 

 the botanical writings of Vaillant, than in identifying with the most worth- 

 less part of vegetation an author whose merits he was unable to imder- 

 stand. No man was more given to sneers of this kind than Linnaeus, and 

 yet his followers manifest a most extraordinary degree of sensitiveness 

 whenever he has been retorted upon in a similar way ; although few ever 

 deserved criticism in some things in a higher degree than himself." Here 

 are three charges against Linnaeus, the incorrectness of which it shall be 

 my business to prove: viz. 1st, That by giving the name of Vaillant to a 

 genus of " worthless weeds," he meant to cast disrespect on his memory ; 

 2dly, That Linnaeus was unable to understand the writings of Vaillant ; and 

 3dly, " That no man was more given to sneers of this kind than 

 Linnanis." 



