81 
Rossica are included, why not such a monumental work as Bois- 
siers Flora Orientalis? And if the Prodromus is mentioned, why 
not its continuation as the Monographiae? Then there is the mat- 
ter of omissions. We fail to find any of Small’s minor works on 
the flora of Florida, nor even the North American Flora, except 
an individual reference to a portion of one number, by Rydberg. 
The remainder of that one part was filled by a contribution of 
the reviewer ; possibly that is a reason why we criticize the whole 
bibliography, but we still believe Ascherson and Graebner’s 
Synopsis should have been at least mentioned. Neither do we find 
any mention of the Index Kewensis, except a citation of the fifth 
supplement alone, nor of the Index Londinensis. Furthermore, 
the list is simply brimming with errors, although every botanist 
is or should be taught that correctness of citation is always essen- 
tial. Thus we find Leroy Abrams, instead of LeRoy; N. J. An- 
derson instead of Andersson; W. P. O. Barton, instead of W. P. 
C. Barton (credited with the authorship of the Flora C estrica!), 
Walter Dean instead of Deane; Stephen Elliot instead of Elliott ; 
W. U. Fawcett instead of W. Fawcett; S. F. Gray’s Natural Ar- 
rangement of British Plants published in 1921 instead of 1821; 
G. J. Hooker instead of W. J. Hooker ; Micheaux instead of 
Michaux; F. S. Milspaugh instead of C. F. Millspaugh; P. O. 
Standley instead of P., C. Standley; J. T. Buckholtz instead of 
Buchholz ; Marong instead of Morong; C. C. Dean instead of 
Deam; Marriam instead of Merriam; even the senior botanist of 
the author’s own university will find his name misspelled Setchel. 
The reader of this review must not understand that these are all 
the errors: anyone can find more, some exasperating, some merely 
amusing. H. S. Pepoon is given the authorship of Synopsis Plan- 
farum in 1805, and possibly the climax is reached when we find 
that Species Plantarum was written by L. Linnaeus! 
Who is to blame for such an extraordinary series of errors? 
One would think that every botanist could give Linnaeus the 
Proper initial and therefore would wish to put the responsibility 
on the printer, But surely someone read proof and let these er- 
rors go through. Even my friend Robert W. Hegner, editor of the 
series, can not entirely escape responsibility. One sighs for the 
Pen of a Fernald, to give these evidences of carelessness proper 
attention, 
The actual information which the student needs to grasp the 
