1896. } Notes on Carex. 3 
If one were to make any full discussion of this subject upon 
its merits, he would need to decide first of all what a name is. 
This question lies at the very bottom of the present unrest in 
nomenclature, yet it is one which is not freely discussed by 
itself. Most of the attention of controversialists is given to 
special and generally subsidiary points in nomenclature. Is 
the name of the plant—that form of expression by which it is 
to be distinguished from all other plants—one word or two, 
the original specific or varietal name or the combination of 
these with the generic name? Is nomenclature monomial or 
binomial? Is du//ata, or Carex bullata, the name of a sedge? 
make synonymous names. Linnzus is supposed to have 
taught that a name has two coordinate and essential parts, 
and that either part alone is not capable of designating any 
particular plant. How, then, do we introduce a different sys- 
tem and then take Linnzus as our starting point? 
A name of any natural object must have two elements: it 
must unequivocally designate the object; and it must have 
some element of permanency in usage. Now, bullata does 
not designate my plant; it does not distinguish if the plant is 
Carex, Salixor Cabbage. But Carex bullata is designative, 
and it has more elements of permanency than bullata from 
the very fact that it is explicit, and also because the combin- 
ation of the two words—Carex and bullata—is likely to be 
more recent, and therefore better understood, than the crea- 
tion of either one alone. The proposed new nomenclature is 
boisterous for stability. Very well! But why is not a com- 
bination of two words just as ‘‘stable” as one word? It is 
easier to get at the proper combination than it is at the or- 
igin of the single word, because the combination, as I have 
said, is the more recent event. Why not tie up at the first 
safe landing place, rather than to run forever backward in a 
profitless search of some shipwrecked name? 
. My second advertence to the Check-List is in reference 
to the exaltation of the varietal name. It was not my privi- 
lege to attend the meeting of the Botanical Club at Madison, 
but it is recorded that a resolution was introduced ‘that the 
varietal name be subject to the same laws of permanency as 
those which govern the specific,” and that after nine persons 
had discussed the proposition ‘‘the Club adjourned without 
