378 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 
as that which decides what name should be retained, has little to 
do with “structure and properties”’ 
A further glance into Prof. Ewart’s published papers seems to 
show t that t it is not only the Vienna Rules to which he refuses 
gathered from his oS to the Victorian Naturalist and 
the ieryr ies of the Royal Society of Victoria, will make my 
meaning clear. 
In the e paper already quoted Prof. Ewart identifies Eriostemon 
gracile Graham with E. difformis A. Cunn.: “ E. gracile,” he says, 
i e olde ould be 
an acce 
doubt that H. gracile (1834) must replace #. pone (1837). 
hh the paragraph headed “ Da aviesia corymbosa var. St. 
Johnu = D. corymbosa var. virgata” begins “ This plant was re- 
parted} in the Victorian Naturalist, Nov. 1906, p. 1383 ”" and con- 
tinues “the name should be variety virgata, in recognition of the 
old specific name for the variety.” Prof. Ewart was quite within 
his rights in giving a new name to the variety, if indeed the plant 
eserves varietal distinction, for a reference to the Victorian 
Naturalist l.c. shows that the name “var. St. Johnii” ccurs, 
without either authority or description, in the list of an exhibition 
of wild flowers, and thus, as a nomen nudum, has no c e- 
e 
necessary to take up the name of a species when the plant bearing 
it is —— to varietal rank. 
roc. Royal Soc. Victoria xx. 80, issued August, se Prot. 
Ewart heads a@ paragraph “ ayer intermedia Die 
Aizoon intermedium Diels.” atter name is given Trocante 
in Prof. Ewart’s opinion, there is =i ound for separating Gunni- 
opsis as a genus. But Dr. Diels thought narwine, and there can 
be no possible justification for attaching his name to a combina- 
oa eae it is obvious he would not have sanctioned. Prof. 
Ewart goes on to say “‘ This new species appears to be - same 
as the Aizoon glabrum recorded by Mr. Luehmann, but of which 
” The paper from which this is an 
extract was read July 11, 1907 ; by November Prof. Ewart had 
altered his mind as to the identity, for in the same volume, p. 128, 
he says that “A. entermedium Diels” comes very close to some 
specimens included by F. v. Mueller in A. zygophylloides, “ and 
ince; it is, however, quite distinct from Luehmann’s unde- 
seribed A. glabrum,” of which a description follows. 
