104 Dr. Darlington' s Address. 



the operative finds it necessary to be well acquainted with his materials, it 

 cannot be less desirable that the farmer should have an accurate knowledge 

 of those objects which demand his care and attention. With such knowl- 

 edge, he can not only understand precisely what plants are most worthy of 

 culture, but, what is scarcely less important, he can comprehend the true 

 character of those which require all his vigilance to exclude, or to extir- 

 pate from his grounds. He can not only identify, to his own satisfaction, 

 the plants which it behoves him to know, but, by the use of an appropri- 

 ate nomenclature, he can make himself perfectly intelligible, when com- 

 municating his information to others. The want of this knowledge, and, 

 especially, the uncertainty of popular names, is a source of much confu- 

 sion and perplexity, in the intercourse of farmers, and in the essays of 

 Agricultural writers.* Every district of country, and almost every neigh- 

 borhood, has its own names for well-known plants : but they are apt to be 

 variously applied, the same plant being frequently known by dlfFerent 

 names, and the same name often bestowed on very distinct plants. A 

 striking instance of this may be cited, by way of illustration, in the use 

 of the term Herd's grass ; which, in New England, is applied to the grass 

 known to us by the name of Timothy, or the Phleum pratense, of the Bot- 

 anists : — whereas, in Pennsylvania, and perhaps in all the States south of 

 it, the term Herd''s grass, is appropriated to a plant technically called Ag- 

 rostis vulgaris, — entirely distinct from the preceding, and of inferior val- 

 ue. This discrepancy is liable to cause annoying mistakes, and has even 

 been the occasion of litigation, between the seedsmen of Boston and 

 Philadelphia. I can perceive no remedy for the errors and confusion re- 

 sulting from a loose and variable popular nomenclature, but a resort to the 

 precise scientific names, imposed by systematic writers. The use of pop- 

 ular names may answer every purpose, in colloquial intercourse with our 

 neighbors : But when we wish to be explicitly understood by strangers, 

 or by persons in trade, it would be better to employ the exact language of 

 science, — and to use those names, for objects, which have a specific mean- 

 ing, recognized by all the world. 



In truth the well-bred Agriculturist, whose business it eminently is to 

 study, and to turn to good account, the products of the soil, ought to 

 know the name, the character, and the entire history, of eveiy plant that 

 he meets with on his premises, — or that approaches him from those of his 

 neighbors : But all I ask, as a commencement is, that he should learn to 

 know the limited number which it is his immediate interest to know, and 

 of which it is disreputable, as well as disadvantageous, to be ignorant. 

 Many worthy persons, I am aware, allege as an excuse for their deficiency 

 in this kind of knowledge, that they have not time to acquire it : But 1 beg 

 leave to intimate to such, that they have mistaken the nature of their com- 



* We almost every day see high-wrought notices of Plants — supposed by the 

 wi-iters to be new, or unknown, and which set the curious all agog, to learn what 

 the wonderful novelties may be : — when, nine times out often, if the proper scien- 

 tific names were given, we should recognize them as old acquaintances, and should 

 always he able to form a tolerable estimate of their value, by a knowledge of their 

 Botanical character and affinities. In all such cases, there is no surer protection 

 against imposition, or what is vulgarly called humbug- — than a competent acquaint- 

 ance with the first principles of Natural History — which should be taught, and 

 considered as an indispensable branch of education, in every school throughout 

 the land. 



