BOTANICAL NOMENCLATURE. 383 



neither is it named unless a specific as well as a generic name 

 is assigned to it. Besides tlie instances in which the old spe- 

 cific name is impossible under another genus, there are very 

 many in which it would be improper or questionable, and in 

 respect to which particular consideration is required. Between 

 these cases and the plain ones in which implied namino- could 

 not go wrong, who is to draw the line? Perhaps it might be 

 drawn at monotypic new genera with old specific names. But 

 how to do even this upon recognized principles is a problem. 



A fatal objection to the principle of names by implication 

 is that all such names, if they are existent, must be indexed 

 in the new "Nomenclator Botanicus" now in preparation. 

 To transcribe under Senecio the specific names pertaining to 

 all the genera which Bentham has referred to that already 

 vast genus is no small matter, and a part of the work will 

 prove superfluous if — as we suppose to be the case — some 

 of these genera, such as Cacalia, ought to be maintained. But 

 that is only the beginning. A more recent author, Baillon, 

 has reduced the genera of Comjyositce nearly one half. For 

 example, to Helenium he has referred Gaillardia, Actinella, 

 Cephalophora, etc. ; to Tagetes he has referred D^^sodia, Ni- 

 colettia, Hymenatherum, and others ; to Helianthus, a greater 

 number of genera, most of them prolific in species. In all 

 probability, most of these reductions will not be approved. 

 Yet, if the principle of constructive naming is adopted, the 

 '^ Nomenclator " must burden its columns with these hosts of 

 inchoate specific names of Baillon, either as received names 

 or as synonyms. It is plain that the principle referred to, 

 besides its incongruity with the leading ideas of received 

 nomenclature, breaks down with its own weiglit. There are, 

 nevertheless, taking arguments in its favor, which need not 

 here be recapitulated ; and the common system has its disad- 

 vantages and liability to abuse ; yet it a2:)i)ears to be the only 

 workable system. As already intimated, the riglit assignment 

 of specific names in reconstructed genera requires particular 

 knowledo'e and careful investigation. And the botanist who 

 reconstructs genera should himself adjust and state the spe- 

 cific names as far as he can. 



