BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTES 35 
published at Salisbury, 1806; the dedication is dated from Bland- 
ord, Jan. 1, 1806, nine days before the author’s death. Subse- 
find further reference to The ‘second edition” was issued 
anonymously, as were the subsequent editions. owed ‘its 
enlargement and correctness to t revision of one of the 
u d Th 
In the Department of Botany formerly belonged to William 
within a thirty mile circuit of Warrington. Loudon (Gard. Mag. 
v. 564) supplies the name of Miss Elizabeth Kent for the “third 
edition,” London, 1829; a so-called “fourth” consists of the 
‘‘remainder” copies of this, with an additional preface and a 
title-page dated 1834. 
The simultaneous preparation of the English Botany and the 
Flora Britannica permitted their author to refer impartially from 
one to the other before actual publication had been effected ; and 
this, where questions of priority of publication are involved, 
Sometimes causes confusion. An intimate knowledge of the 
works themselves and of the literature dealing with them 
on his behalf, for the 
Js valuable evidence, 
but it must not be regarded as absolute proof of what nomen- 
claturists rank as “ effective publication.” For example, although 
t. 1065 (Carex teretiuscula) is dated Dec. 1, 1796, it did not appear 
until 1802 in E.B.vol.xv. With this exception, any plate bearing 
prior date to April 1, 1800, may be assumed to antedate the Flora 
Britannica. Iam unable to decide in the case of those of even date 
ve 715-726), but those of a later date appeared subsequent to the 
rst two volumes of the Flora; although the citations sometimes 
rank as “ ined.,” this indication is of no nomenclatorial value. 
The publication of the third yolume of the Flora was delayed 
