FIRST RECORDS OF BRITISH FLOWERING PLANTS 281 
from Nubia (Kotschy), or of any reference to C. Whitfieldit Seem. 
The latter was published in Bonplandia (x. 250) in 1862, and 
ver 
subsequently described by C. cephalanthum—a name 
aker retains for the variety of C. oe “ which 
he refers the plant: the figure of C. capitatum in Bot. Mag. (4355) 
should have been cited here 
gal e name C. towicarium is given in the monograph as if 
it were published for the first time; reference should have been made 
to its appearance (without description) i in Engler’s Pflanzenwelt Ost- 
Afrikas, C. 840, where it stands as of ‘‘ Bak. mse. in sched. coll. 
Buchanan n. 1075." The reference to ‘‘ Bak. mse.” is to an in- 
complete and unpublished though printed list of tentative names 
distributed with one of Buchanan’s collections, which is cited else- 
where in this part as ‘ Buchanan, Nyasaland = ts, 1891 ;”’ this 
has not the remotest claim to rank as a publication 
é an inconsistency in the priority accorded to certain 
names. On p. 297, for example, “ C. formicarum Girke in Engl. 
Jahrb. xviii. 179” is pens given precedence over ‘‘ C. triplinerve 
Rolfe in Bolet. Soc. Brot. xi. 87’’; but on p. 821 “ Vitex flavescens 
Rolfe in Bolet. Soc. Brot. xi. 37” is retained, while “ V. Pree 
Giirke in Engl. Jahrb. 167” is reduced. Prof. Engler 
paper was published in Decne 1898; Mr. Rolfe’s did not scene 
until the following year. 
comparison between the Welwitsch Catalogue and Mr. Baker’s 
work suggests further criticisms, which, however, may well be 
Mr. Hiern’s enum 
has arisen on this occasion shall be guarded against in future issues. 
First Records of British Flowering Plants. Compiled by Wu. 
. Crarxe, F.L.S. Second edition, revised and shaun 
L ae West, Newman & Co. 8vo, cloth, pp. xvi, 194. 
Price 
THis new "ition of Mr. Clarke’s interesting compilation con- 
tains ‘‘many desirable pant and certain other additions: 
e.g. ‘the names used by Ray and other old authors” are given in 
on; & on- 
an never safely be based upon second-hand citations, 
cana careful these may be. Another addition is that of “ the 
botanist or old author who first used the name, though perhaps not 
for the same [generic] plant’; and the English names are eens ” 
many cases for the genera and in fewer for ‘the species. We d 
know what, or whether any, principle determines the ag of 
rahe naines—why, for example, Nepeta Glechoma has its English 
equivalent while N. Cataria is without it—but in all matters 
