EDITORIAL. 
For vears the Journal of Botany has annually had its fling at the 
Reports of the Missouri Botanic Garden, and the November number 
affords the last example of this unpleasant spirit. Usually with little 
or nothing to say of the scientific papers beyond faint commendation, 
the editor has devoted his energies to ridiculing the annual flower 
sermon and the post-prandial eloquence at the annual banquet. Un- 
fortunately, since they are embodied in a will, the eccentric ideas of 
the dead Englishman have to be carried out as rigorously as his benef- 
icent ones are executed gladly. And we may be permitted to suggest 
to the editor that his own island house so abounds in transparent fol- 
lies of the same sort that it is really not becoming in him to pelt our 
few imported windows. 
THIs NUMBER of the Journal has also its stale gibe at “the reform- 
ing zeal of our transatlantic.friends”, which it now sees manifesting 
itself in the formation of the Botanical Society of America. Just 
what connection the organization of this society has with our “reform- 
ing zeal” we imagine it would be hard for the-editor to state; but he 
has thrust in his innuendo and his readers are given to understand 
that this also is part of a huge farce which is being enacted in the 
transatlantic wilds in the name of botany. 
* 
* - 
Tuat sAME reforming zeal, which seems so ridiculous in the eyes of 
our “British-and-foreign” friend, vaunteth not itself and is not puffed 
up, spite of the good it is accomplishing and the promise and potency 
of more. It has a most simple mission; it aims only to secure as great 
accuracy and uniformity of usage as users of botanical language may 
feel inclined to adopt. It brings together a considerable number of 
botanists, who, having in view present usage, agree that it is desirable 
to follow certain principles in nomenclature, or in citation, or in ter- 
minology, or in pronunciation. This agreement coerces no one, if 
denounces no one, it asks no one to acknowledge its ‘authority. 
Still less have “its supporters . a case to prove” as the authors of the 
Flora of Mt. Desert assert. The parties to the agreement have only 
to submit its principles, clearly enunciated, to those interested, and 
let each determine whether he is willing by adopting them to be Beg 
tated to by a comparatively few botanists”; or whether he will follow | 
other principles, or none at all. The choice is-a simple one, and ae & 
friends that follow not with us need not fash themselves over the 
source Of our authority to cast out devils. ; 
