May 15, 191 1 57 



which at limes is a grateful aid to the recognition of the plant 

 intended; for, as may be inferred from the journal in which the 

 paper is published, it represents the extremest school of neo- 

 americanism, both in segregations and in the names adopted; 

 indeed, it is not without its own contributions to the instability 

 of American botanical nomenclature. But this, whether re- 

 garded as a merit or a fault, is a matter of little moment; the 

 important thing is that the author tells us much of value about 

 the plants themselves. The scope of his paper frees him from 

 the necessity of deciding what constitutes a tree, but leaves him 

 to draw the uncertain line that separates a shrub from a suffru- 

 tescent or suffruticose plant; but while there are a few doubtful 

 cases, both of inclusion and of exclusion, the decision has been 

 generalK- made with sound judgment. 



The new edition of Doctor Jepson's Flora presents itself in 

 an enlarged form and a very neat binding. It contains about 

 the same number of species as the first edition, the additions 

 being offset by the reductions. The sequence of families has 

 been altered in accordance with present views of relationship 

 and descent, and almost every page shows more or less traces of 

 revision. The treatment of the Gymnosperms is practically new, 

 while in most cases the revision is confined to slight changes in 

 the keys or descriptions. IMr. Chandler contributes the genus 

 Nemophila in accordance with his monograph, and Miss McDer- 

 mott an entirely new and good account of Trifolium. The text 

 of the Gluniaceae is nearly unchanged from that proposed by 

 Mr. Davy f<T ihe first edition. The international rules of no- 

 menclature are followed to the advantageous displacement of 

 Allenrolfia, Adenostegia^ Bolelia^ BlephaHpappns^ and other 

 names used in the first edition. Cerasus is reduced to Primus^ 

 Mains to Pyriis, Drevoortia to Brodiaea, and similar changes 

 are made indicative of the author's increased conservatism in 

 the estimation of greneric values. In its new form the Flora 

 enters a second decade of usefulness, and we can only regret that 

 its author did not enlarge its scope to include the whole state. — 

 S. R. Parish. 



