INDEX KEWENSIS. 818 
album Ait. Hort. Kew. ed. I. iii. 803 pies 
canadense Michx. Fl. Bor. Am. ii. 261 (1803). 
hirsutum Mill. Gard. Dict. ed. VIII. = 3 (1760). 
Regine Walt. Fl. Carol. 222 (1788). 
Salisbury, . se amt knows, had odd peaks on perms i 
and thought it no blame to supersede a name by one. which 
possible doubt, onever is set at rest o reference to di 
Herbarium, now in the British Museum, where there is a ast 
scapes labelled ‘* Cypr sagen rhe This is the name which 
t stand. r. Jackson also allows Salisbury’s C. humile (1793) 
to penta C. pth Ait. (1791), which he mee. would not have 
done had the respective dates been before 
Yet another Cypripedium must change ite name. Mr. Jackson 
cites— 
« flavescens [DC. in] Red. Lil. i. t. 20 = areas 
pubescens Willd. Hort. Berol. i. 18-- 
C. pubescens was first published by Willdenow, Be in ‘the Hortus 
Berolinensis (1816), but in Sp. Pl. iv. 148 (1805). Even 80, 
however, flavescens Bitte it, for the first volume of Redouté’s 
Liliacées came out in 1802: both must yield to hirsutum Mill, 
1760). In connection with Cypripedium I may note that Prof. 
Ascherson’s “ emendation,”’——-Cypripedilum,—published in 1864, 
finds no place in the Index. 
Another advantage gained by adding the date would be the 
immediate determination, ceteris paribus, which of two retained 
species bearing the same name--a more requent ane than 
might be supposed, and one which the Indew will do to avert 
in the fuente entitled to priority. When we find anedee Calce- 
“hypoleuca, Benth. in DC. Prod. x, 222. 
hypoleuca, Meyen, Reise, i. 224.” 
the addition of the roe each would at once settle which plant 
had ara claim to the 
I think I have said eno to justify my oe as to adding 
to each species the date at which it was pu ished; and, having 
man 
re Vello £0. As it is, one finds side by side, in precisely similar 
type and mode of Saree 
‘Drurii, Bedd. Ic. Ind, Or, i. 23,—Ind. Or. 
epidendricum Vell. 1 Fl Flum, is, t. 64,--Bras.:” 
