165 



California, the last three in Washington. If (ireenc- had remained 

 in California, it is likely that the new serial Erythea, which he 

 established at Berkeley, would have permanently superseded 

 Pittonia, and that no more than the first two volumes of the 

 latter would have appeared. Aside from these serials, the busy 

 years at the University of California saw the publication of 

 Flora Franciscana, which was never completed, and of the Manual 

 of the Botany of the Region of San Francisco Bay. He also 

 edited for publication Kellogg's illustrations of West American 

 oaks, for which he wrote the accompanying text. 



Prior to beginning his "Studies in the Botany of California," 

 Greene had had twenty short articles in the American Naturalist, 

 Botanical Gazette, and Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. 

 These were of course carefully scrutinized by Gray, who did not 

 attempt to conceal his distrust of the work of the younger man. 

 When the first installments of the "Studies" reached him he 

 reviewed them as follows: "They show a quickness quite equal 

 to the author's well known quickness and acuteness in obser- 

 vation. Besides the interesting new material here elaborated — 

 much of it gathered in an enterprising expedition by boat to the 

 islands of Lower California — there is a good deal of reconstruction 

 of old species, a large number of new ones, and several new or 

 restored genera of plants. Valuable as these contributions to 

 our botany must be, we suppose that more time for elaboration, 

 less confidence as to specific distinctions, and a more restrained 

 judgment about genera might have made them better. Yet 

 opinions will naturally differ in botany as well as upon other 

 subjects." 



Gray's reception of ''Pittonia''' was even more curt: "We 

 may infer that Pittonia is in reference to the family name of 

 Tournefort, and that the publication may have had for its model 

 the Adansonia of Baillon; but the ideas of genera and species 

 are on quite another model. Perhaps the plan may be that of 

 the Linnaea; for, as in that occasional rather than serial publi- 

 cation, a portion of the pages is given to reviews of recent botani- 

 cal literature. Good botanists have followed Decaisne in re 

 ferring the Big-roots to Echinocystis; but we suppose that the 



