160 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 
which occurred at Poole on March 5, resulted from severe burns 
caused by the upsetting of an oil lamp. . 
Tue erratic little Kew Bulletin seems to have succumbed to a 
form of appendicitis. The last issue of the Bulletin proper appeared 
in September, 1901, but the “appendixes” to the non-existent 
journal continue to appear: the first for 1904’ was issued in 
December, 1903, and contains an exchange list of seeds; the 
second, which appeared in March, is a catalogue of the additions 
to the Kew library received in 1903. 
Tur Report for 1903 of the Ashmolean Natural History Society 
of Oxfordshire contains biographies of William Baxter (1787-1871) 
and H. W. BE. Garnsey (1826-1903) from the pen of Mr. G. C. Druce. 
Mr. Garnsey, Mr. Druce tells us, has laid ‘‘ Anglo-Saxon speaking 
botanists” under no mean debt by his translations of German bo- 
tanical works; but do any botanists speak Anglo-Saxon ? 
e 
which contains critical remarks on other species. It seems strange 
that so important a contribution to African botany should have been 
overlooked. Sa 
Frye years ago we noticed the publication of Riviera Nature 
Notes, a second and enlarged edition of which is now before us 
he numerous additional illustrations render the new edition even 
more attractive than its predecessor. It is an excellent example of 
the kind of book—chatty, observant, amusing—which can be pro- 
duced by a man who keeps his eyes open, remembers what he sees, 
and knows how to write ; and is thoroughly readable from cover to 
cover. Why the author does not put his name to it we cannot 
imagine: he certainly has nothing to be ashamed of! There are 
notes by Sir Thomas Hanbury, one of which, stating that Mande- 
villea is named after Sir John Mandeville, who introduced it into 
England,” is somewhat startling, as the only Sir John Mandeville 
most of us know about is the medieval and it is to be feared 
mythical traveller so called: the plant actually commemorates 
Henry John Mandeville, who was H.B.M. Minister at B 
in 1 
g; e.g. ‘Athragene” (p. 208); “ Pelliseri’’? (p. 276) for 
Pelisseriana; “Arangeli” (p. 889) for Arcangeli; ‘ Cymballaria” 
(p. _ We note that the author still clings to his belief that 
‘* Bedstraw’’ should be *Beadstraw,” although he defers to our 
- objection that its stalk could not be used as a rosary (Journ. Bot. 
1899, 95), he thinks it may ‘‘ have obtained its name from its like- 
_ ness to a rosary’’: unfortunately he makes it clear that he does not 
and Mrs. 
difficult of identification. 
