22 REVIEWS. 



demanded not only by statute law, but also for the avoidance 

 of the intricately conflicting names recently imi^osed, was 

 adopted in the MSS. for this family prej^ared for the " Flora 

 of North America," and also in the writer's " Manual of the 

 Botany of the Northern United States." Besides A. uni- 

 Jioru7n^ we have in the AYest and North, A. comosiim, and A. 

 fasciculatwn. To the Genera affinia vel dubia, Reuter ap- 

 pends Obolaria, which is correctly described, except that the 

 insertion of the ovules over the whole inner surface of the 

 ovary is overlooked ; the present writer's illustration of this 

 genus not having reached Geneva until after this family was 

 printed off. 



The great family of this volume, occupying almost four 

 hundred pages, is the order Acanthacece, which is contributed 

 by Nees von Esenbeck. This chiefly tropical or subtropical 

 family, founded less than forty years ago upon a small number 

 of genera and species, now ranks among the largest of the 

 monopetalous series, and is arranged by Nees under two sub- 

 orders, eleven tribes, and 146 genera (including those of the 

 appendix). We have few Acanthacece in the United States, 

 so that an analysis of the family would not interest our 

 readers. We are pleased to find that the writer's reference 

 of the RuelUa justiciceflora^ Hook, (the Eberlea of Riddell), 

 to the genus Hygrophila, R. Br. (vide PI. Lindheim, p. 22, 

 note), is confirmed by Nees von Esenbeck. It appears that 

 the species is also Mexican, and had been already described 

 by Schlechtendal. Our Ruellige belong to Dipteracanthus 

 and Calophanes. Our Diantliera Americana^ L., with its 

 allies, is included in the large genus Rhytigiossa, established 

 by Nees (in Lindl. Introd. Nat. Syst., ed. 2) a few years 

 ago, on some Cape of Good Hope species, from which the 

 author suggests that the American species may differ gen- 

 erically. However that may be, w^e urgently protest against 

 this suppression of the old Gronovian and Linnsean genus, 

 Dianthera, which was founded upon our species ; and which 

 name, although unaccountably overlooked by Endlicher, who 

 is usually careful, as well as by Nees, who is careless, as to 

 questions of priority, must surely be continued for the genus, 



