198 



A LACiNiATE RuBUS. — Dr. Greene's suggestive paper on Rhus 

 bipinnata leads me to recall an instance within my own knowl- 

 edge, which may throw light on the origin of a cultivated plant. 

 Many years ago I found in a hedge of Ridnts rusticaims, in Kent, 

 England, a single plant which bore laciniate leaves, but did not 

 seem to differ otherwise from true rusticamis. In Science Gossip, 

 August, 1889, I gave some account of it, and proposed to call it 

 R. rusticamis var. incisus. Later I sent a specimen to Kew, and it 

 was identified as R. laciniatus Willd., a well-known garden plant 

 of uncertain origin. It appears to me nearly certain that the 

 plant of incisus originated where I found it, from rusticamis 

 ancestry ; but it can hardly be doubted that R. laciniatus itself 

 had a like history, at some time and place now wholly forgotten. 



T. D. A. COCKERELL. 

 Bori.DER, Colorado. 



• Duplex Names. — In my work over a Patagonian flora I 

 have been compelled to face the problem of giving twin names 

 to species whose original specific names have been raised 

 to generic standing. Provisionally and under protest, I have 

 accepted such names, and even added to the list. But I have 

 never been satisfied with the system which they represent ; and 

 I am satisfied that Turczaninow would not have erected the new 

 genus Ugni for Molina's old species Myrtus Ugni, if he had for- 

 seen as its outcome the ultimate name Ugni Ugni (Mol.) Macl., 

 a system that duplicates priorities for the old specific name and 

 extinguishes the priority of the other part C)f the first name. 



As the question was re-opened at the recent International Bo- 

 tanical Congress in Vienna, I venture to submit, not for immedi- 

 ate acceptance, but for consideration, and for acceptance, if ap- 

 proved, the following rule — Whenever a specific name of a plant 

 has been promoted so as to become its generic name, then the 

 previous generic name shall be demoted so as to become the new 

 specific name ; the original authorit}' to be parenthesized. Thus 

 the .species which I have reluctantly called Ugni Ugni (Mol.) 

 should become Ugni Myrtus (Mol.), the priority of both the prim- 

 itive names being in this case preserved. This rule would give 

 Fagopyrum Polygonum (L.), Sassafras Laurus (L.), etc. 



