1892. ] Current Literature. 95 
is not done we shall not be surprised to have an early announcement 
similar to that in the December number of the American Naturalist, 
in which appears the naive item — we are sure our readers will appre- 
ciate its fine humor — “ Prof. C. H. Gilbert is professor of Vertebrate 
Biology in Leland Stanford University.” 
IN THIS CONNECTION we are much pleased to note the establishment 
of a new chair of histology and cryptogamic botany at Cornell Uni- 
versity. This is a move in the right direction. 
CURRENT LITERATURE. 
Kuntze’s “ Revisio Generum Plantarum.” ? 
This is one of the most ambitious botanical works of recent years, 
and has involved a prodigious amount of labor. However botanists 
may differ as to its conclusions, they must always be grateful for the 
vast amount of facts thus brought together. It is becoming more and 
More apparent that the nomenclaturists are not to agree with each 
other, at least until another congress has definitely established a datum 
line. In the meantime the systematist who is not a nomenclaturist 
feels inclined to reserve his opinion until the dust has settled some- 
what and things can be seen more clear y. When all the ancient 
records have been searched, and books like those before us have be- 
turists, of whom Dr. Kuntze seems to be the bright consummate 
flower, but to emphasize the fact that we are still in the period of 
iggt os: 
The volumes before us are such as will demand consultation by all 
those who deal in phytography. The wealth of reference is marvel- 
K ME - ; 
Ccellul Tze, Orro.— Revisio Generum Plantarum vascularium omnium atque 
eoumeratio multarum secundum leges lat i tionales cum 
atione plantarum exoticarum in itinere mundi collectarum. 2 ‘es 
Steche? glxvix, 1011. Leipzig, London, Milan, Paris, New York (Gust. 
Broadway), 1891 
