362 BOTANICAL GAZETTE [NOVEMBER 
This simple and definite method of obtaining a uniform system of 
names has been carefully tested, however, during the past half decade, 
and it has appealed as practical to many besides the “ trans-Carlines.” 
Let us now consider, on the other hand, the points raised by Pro- 
fessor Britton. The first rule of the Rochester Code reads: ‘‘ Priority 
of publication is to be regarded as the fundamental principle of 
botanical nomenclature.” The fifth rule that ‘ Puddcation of a genus 
consists only (1) in the distribution of a printed description of the 
genus named ; (2) in the publication of the name of the genus and the 
citation of one or more previously published species as examples or types 
of the genus, with or without a diagnosis” [italics ours]. A recom- 
mendation adopted by the reformers at Madison reads: “In determin- 
ing the name of a genus or species to which two or more names have 
been given by an author in the same volume or on the same page of a 
volume precedence shall decide.” 
By Professor Underwood, as already emphasized in the March 
GazettE, this principle of strict priority has been applied in the 
determination of the type of a complex genus. Professor E. L. 
Greene, likewise, has made important changes based upon its rigid 
enforcement. Professor Britton, too, has more than once maintained 
that priority of place (precedence) is final, saying, in regard to the 
now famous case of Buda and Tissa: “I accepted Z7%ssa rather than 
Buda for the simple reason that it stands first on the page in Adanson’s 
‘Familles.’ That is priority, 1am sure” [italics ours].3 He has further 
said that this principle (priority of position) will be accepted by those 
who have recognized the necessity of adopting methods of procedure 
which will render the system of nomenclature stable.”® And again, 
“the number of cases in which change is desirable by reason of priority 
of place is not great.”? Thus, in 1890, Professor Britton clearly 
defined what he meant by priority. In 1892, “after a very careful 
consideration,” the Rochester Code was formulated ; and in 1893, 
after plenty of time for further deliberation on its fundamental prin- 
ciple, the code was augmented by the recommendation above quoted. 
Priority has been talked of until the subject has become a tedious 
one; and that it is the ruling principle of the reformers has been so — 
often avowed as to become axiomatic. It is not surprising, then, to 
find, in the ///ustrated Flora in 1896, the statement that “ its [ priority ’s] 
S Jour, Bot. 28: 295. 1890. 
*Jour. Bot. 28 : 371. 1890. 7 Jour. Bot. 28 : 372. 1890. 
