H 



He puts A. sparsiflorus here when it belongs in the Sparsiflori. 



He renames Gray's Section Microlobi and calls it Rugocarpus. 

 belongs in the Lotiflori along with Mohavensis. He puts A humi- 



In the Ocreati he puts A. accumbens (procumbens) when it 

 stratus here when it is better placed in the Homalobi. 



The Galegiformes he renames but puts A. atropubescens in it 

 vhfn it belones in the Reventi-arrecti. He puts A. Howelli and 

 •-■'isellus here when they belong in the Hamosi. 



He makes a new section for A. asclepiadoides and calls it 

 '^sclepiadodps. ignoring the fact that I had previously suggested 

 the name Pachyphyllus for the section, but the species is better 

 placed in the Preussii. 



He creates a new section and calls it Eremiticus. This :s 

 another hodge-podse of species. It contains A. diphacus which be- 

 longs in the Didymocarpi. A, terer which belongs in the Leptocarpi. 

 A. obscurus which belongs in the Atrati. A. Panamintensis also be- 

 lonsrs in the Atr-iti. A. recurvus belongs in the Strigulosui. A. 

 '^achypus which belongs in the Sclerocarpi. A. sylvaticus which 

 l)elongs in the Hamosi. A. tricarinatus which belongs in the Hamosi 

 A. arrectus which belorigs in the Reventi-arrecti. A. Brandegei 

 which belongs in the Strignlosi. A. drppanolobus which goes in the 

 Hamosi. A. Bolanderi which belongs in the Reventi-arrecti. A. 

 malacns which goes in the Malaci. A. Andersoni, Congdoni and 

 "^rcuttianus which go in the Hamosi. A. Rusbyi which belongs in 

 the Strigiilosi. A. Arizonicus which belongs in the Hamosi. A. 

 lp"tnrarpus. streptopus (ncutirostis), Nuttallianus, Wrightii all of which 

 belong in the Leptocarri. A. albens which goes in the Hamosi. A. 

 D^'ene fvaccarum) whVh g^es in the Micranthi. •'<. Cobrensis 

 whJch gre^. witb th<^ Ftrig'iiosi. A. hypoxylus, Pringlei, Hartwegi 

 and vaccarum which belong in the Micranthi. 



He again creates a nevr name for an old section, the Didymo- 

 carpi, calling it Dispermus. 



Under the Hypoglottidei which he renames Hvpoglottidens he 

 '^iits A. ventorum (Oreganus) and terminalis which belong in the 

 Uliginosi. 



Under the Uliginosi he puts A. ervoides which neither he nor 

 pi-vone el<=o knows anything -''-^--t. He also places A. accidens hero 

 which beloners in the Reventi-rrrecti. 



Under the Mollissimi he puts A. I.,ayneae which belongs with 

 the Malaci. 



TTnder the Chaetodontes he follows Watson in keeping A. calyco- 

 sus there but which belongs in the Hamosi, and which he would have 

 n'aced in his Sniesiodes, if he had known anything about the species 

 along with A. Arizonicus. 



Under the Lentiginosi he puts A. Bajaensis (Hornii) which be- 

 longs in the Inflati. 



He again makes a new name for an old section the Sarcocarpi 

 by calling it Carnosocarpus. 



At the end he has 27 unplaced species. 



The list shows no conception of genetic relationship other than 

 that indicated by his predecessors, and a continual blundering in 

 the placing of new species, as well as a disregard for priority in the 

 naming of sections, which is wholly unexcusable. 



GENERIC SEGREGATION. 



The conception of Astragalus as a genus began with Tourne- 

 fort if not earlier. Since his time some sixty genera have been 

 proposed as segregates from it. Tournefort himself separated Phaca 

 under the name of Astragaloides, and Linnaeus in Linn Corolli. Gen. 



