

Igor] NOMENCLATORIAL PRINCIPLES Tg3 
he proposed was Eucephalus nemoralis, based upon Aster nemo- 
ralis Ait., though in Aster he left the closely related and often 
indistinguishable A. acuminatus Michx. In the new Catalogue 
we find under Aster, A. nemoralis Ait., listed and numbered, while 
under Eucephalus we have E. nemoralis Greene, treated in the same 
handsome manner. The troublesome Aster nemoralis var. Blakei 
Porter, however, a plant which so mingles the characters of 
Lucephalus nemoralis Greene and Aster acuminatus Michx. as to 
embarrass even its own author, is wisely left with Aster nemoralis. 
Why, then, if Zucephalus nemoralis is identical with Aster nemo- 
rats, does the author of the Catalogue list the variety of the latter 
only under Aster, when the species is treated as belonging to 
both genera ? 
Many of us were brought up to speak of Adsma Plantago L. 
and Veronica Anagallis L., but during the past decade the fol- 
lowers of the Rochester Code have adopted the fad of calling 
these plants Alisma Plantago-aquatica and Veronica Anagalls- 
aquatica, The use of such names has indeed afforded an inter- 
esting diversion and has kept us constantly tingling with expect- 
ant excitement as we have waited to see what other familiar 
names would appear in new and fantastic garb; but it must be 
confessed that a careful search in the volumes of Species Plan- 
tarum, where these names are said to occur, has failed to reveal 
them. Instead this is what is found: Veronica Anagall.y and 
Alisma Plantago A. Thus it seems that Linnaeus did not write 
even Anagallis in full; and we should like to be informed on 
what authority (in the Species Plantarum) we know that A and Vv 
are both mysterious ways of writing aguatica? And if a triangle 
is said to mean aguatica why do not the reformers append that 
adjective to their Rorifa Nasturtium, for Linnaeus wrote Sisym- 
brium ib sen Siaeata’ or does the position of the triangle in relation 
to the name give it a new meaning? Here is a great oppor- 
tunity for someone to hunt up all the triangles in the Species 
Plantarum and thus give us a new lot of specific names. But, 
Seriously, we may ask why, in the new edition of the Catalogue 
{as in the old), this modern fad was followed ? 
