i 
250 NOTICES OF BOOKS. 
work will no doubt be useful to the country | and others 
who have sets of the ‘ Botanical Magazine on their shelves. 
The volume is well printed, every other page ‘og blank, to allow 
of the interlineation of additions. But we regret that he did not see 
his way to following the advice of ‘‘ the authorities at Kew,” who 
said ‘that to be a creditable performance the index should be 
revised by a gompetant botanist.” Mr. Tonks frankly tells us 
“that he is not a botanist, but only a lover of plants’’; and his 
having ‘“ taken some liberties with the names” is evidence of this, 
as well as his justification of this line of conduct by the statement 
that ‘“ botanists’ evonsloiure is very curious, and apparently 
limited by no rules”! 
One or two © instances of the mode of treatment adopted will 
book 
serve to give an idea of the insufficiency of the book. Mr. Tonks 
says that the editors have “ frequently caper the mistake of 
re-illustrating plants already depicted in their n work.’”’ Open- 
ing his Index at random we find what seems re first sight to be an 
instance of this— 
“* Cypripedium parviflorum 22, 911 
57, 8024.” 
But on eegeremy3 the text to plate 3024 we find that ‘ C. parvi 
florum of Old Series of Bot. Mag. t. 911, should assuredly be 
cso to C. pubescens.” botanist would have noticed this 
correction, but Mr. Tonks, anttally enough, has not done so; so 
that his Index contains two ep ene - par eto while C. 
that another rr ick atechusaty required.” No doubt in 
some cases os wakes censure is deserved, as in that of Begonia 
Wageneriana, figured on t. 4988, Sea again on t. 5047. 
The index of synonyms, as n in the same 107 volumes, ae 
suffers from want of botanical Generated. A botanist would n 
have passed as a synonym such a fragment of an old desexpiv 
phrase as ‘“ Alsine eed ” and would have discriminated yah: 
pres synonymy. and. such as is aggane useless. Nor can we 
mend the « Index oo ees uar Names.” ‘“ Fair Maids of 
nee,’ for instance, is not a popular name ook the s Ranun- 
enus 
culus, as Mr Tonks euatns to imply, but only ie ons species, 
R. attygedenen, fl. pl. 
We cannot help feeling sorry that Mr. Tonks did not add to 
his Deedes | a sketch of the history of the ‘ Botanical Magazine.’ 
Extending back, as it does, for nearly a century, such a sketch, 
with lists of the botanists and artists engaged upon the work, 
would have been both useful and interesting, and would have added 
value to this General Index. 
We are indebted to our correspondent, Mr. H. C. Hart Fn ‘ 
copies of two papers published by him in the last number (2nd 
Ser. vol. iii. (Science), no. 10, June, 1888) of the ‘ Proceedings of 
the Royal Wich Academy.’ The first is entitled ‘Notes on the 
