1895.] A Reply to Dr. Robinson’ s Criticism. 167 
Columbia College Department of Botany. 
Torrey Botanical Club. 
Nebraska State University and State Botanical Survey. 
Indiana State Botanical Survey. 
University of Minnesota and State Natural History Survey. 
University of California. 
University of Wisconsin. 
University of Ohio and State Botanical Survey. 
Kansas Agricultural College. 
Systematic Botany of North America. 
Eli Lilly & Co., drug dealers. 
United States Official Pharmacopoeia of 1890 (the last is- 
sued). 
Sargent’s Silva of North America. 
The directors of many other botanical establishments, many 
scientific serials, and a very large number of individual bot- 
anists have also published in conformity with the same prin- 
ciples. Thus the new system seems to have those marks of 
early virility which are usually possessed by long needed and 
stable reforms. 
To hold that the ornithologists—to draw an illustration 
from a popular science—have not a more useful or stable no- 
menclature than formerly, or that they regret their reform, or 
that the movement has brought its early supporters into pop- 
ular disrepute, or that the revised names are now considered 
objectionable, is to question matters of fact. 
In closing, therefore, I feel justified in expressing the hope 
that Dr. Robinson and the few who think with him on this 
Subject will lay aside personal prejudices and join the remain- 
ing nine-tenths of our botanists and almost all our concholo- 
gists, ichthyologists, herpetologists, ornithologists and mam- 
malogists, in a nomenclature based on scientific needs and a 
Scientific method. 
United States National Herbarium, Washington, D. C. 
