a. 
236 Botanical Writings of Rafinesque. 
Tracts in the Western Review, about the year 1820. Among 
them is a Monograph of North American Roses ; in which thir- 
ty-three species indigenous to the United States are described! 
Also a Monograph of Houstonia, in which fourteen species are 
described, exclusive of the Hedyotis crassifolia of his Florula Lu- 
doviciana, of which he forms a new genus! These tracts, with 
another on the classification of some natural families, have been 
reprinted in the fifth, sixth, and seventh volumes of the Annales 
Générales des Sciences Physiques, at Brussels.—The following 
are unknown to us. 
, 1821. 
¢ Western Minerva ; several new genera ; suppressed 
by my rivals!” y ; 
1822. “The Cosmonist, twenty numbers, Lexington.—New 
Plants of Kentucky.” 
.  Prenanthes Opicrina, and other plants, Cincinnati.” 
1824. “ Florula Kentuckensis and Prodromus N. sp.; Lexing- 
ton.” No intimation is given of the place or form of publication. 
1824. First Catalogues and Circulars of the Botanic Garden 
of Transylvania University, Kentucky. 
1825. Neogenyton, or indication of sixty-six new genera of 
plants of North America.—A loose sheet of four pages, printed at 
Lexington ; and we believe reprinted in Seringe’s Bulletin. A 
few good genera are indicated in this tract, but not properly char- 
acterized. 'The best are, Cladrastis (Virgilia lutea ; upo? whic 
e endeavors to establish three or four species,) and Stylipus: A 
few are good, but anticipated by other authors ; such as Helichroa 
(in which some seven or eight species are made out of at most 
three,) which is Echinacea of Mcench ; and Megadenus, which 
is Eleocharis of Brown; several others may be found to indicate 
sections or sub-genera; but about fifty of the sixty-six are abso- 
lute nonsense.* 
mon on the surface of the Ohio in summer, havi f pieces of ropes 
or oakum. It smells like Conferva.” Rafinesque, l. ¢. p. 16. 
* Thus, Tomostigma is founded upon Draba Caroliniana ; Hartiana, upon Anem- 
to belong 
sas Ene 
gia sylvatica, &c. &c. It is but fair to notice, however, that it appe@ 
species cited, that his Ptilemnium is the same with Discopleura, DC., his SP aa 
lepis with Leptocaulis, Nutt., and his Oxypolis with Archemora, DC., but peor 
with an Angelica and Tiedmannia. None of them could have been identified by 
the characters assigned. 
