162 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 
undertaken by monographers, except in so far as they come in the 
natural course of a more limited investigation. 
t is to be regretted that, owing to the inaccuracy of the dates 
persistently given by certain periodicals as those of issue, plants 
are included in this Supplement which have no claim to a place 
therein. When, in 1896 (p. 169), we gave the first of the lists 
showing the actual dates of the publication of the Kew Bulletin, 
since continued on the completion of each volume, we pointed out 
that the number dated December, 1895, “was not issued until 
January, 1896, and that the new species it contained would pro- 
bably be included in any list of novelties for 1895.” This has now 
actually happened, for we find cited in the Supplement from this 
very number Conyza cylindrica and C. stenodonta of Baker, and 
Caralluma arabica N. E. Br.—plants which were not published within 
the decade, and should not be included in the volume. ul 
suggest to the compilers the advisability of consulting the lists of 
dates for the Bulletin already given in these pages; as it may be 
convenient for others to note them, we give the references :— 
Kew Bulletin, ‘ 1895 See Journ. Bot. 1896, 169. 
“25 
96.” 
” ” ” 51. 
” ” 1897.” ” 1898, 239. 
5 » 1898.” a 1899, 399. 
eo 1888.” ¥ 1901, 855. 
i » £1900.” None yet published. 
; **1901.” Not yet completed. 
interests of science each volume of the Bulletin should 
paratively innocuous. 
e note that a somewhat large number of hybrids are intro- 
duced ; this is not without precedent in the Indeaw, and there 18 
something to be said for their inclusion, but we doubt whether on 
the whole it is desirable. Another innovation is the appending of 
the authority to the names to which a synonym is reduced ; ¢.g-: 
** erotonoides, Pierre=Chrysophyllum crotonoides, Klotzch.” 
The plan of the Index, in which the authority was only appended 
when the same name was retained for two species, neither being 
