252 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 



Battle. It is an interesting plant, and we were greatly pleased to 

 see it." Again, when speaking of Buttercups (p. 45) Mr. Hulme 

 gives absolutely no characters for distinguishing the various species, 

 but limits R. acris to " the hedgerow" (!), and speculates whether 

 a Buttercup found in flower in December "was in impatient 

 anticipation of the spring, or a laggard unwillingness to admit that 

 that season was at last over M — in December ! 



It would be easy to extend this criticism, but enough has been 

 said to show that for instructive purposes the book is practically 

 useless. Yet we have no doubt that it will be praised in the 

 newspaper press — indeed, the publishers already advertise that 

 "Countryside tells you: 'This book is invaluable'" — which un- 

 fortunately too often misleads where it ought to guide, especially 

 when science is concerned. The proofs have not been carefully 

 read: e.g. Erythraa Centaurea (twice), Artemesia (twice in index, 

 where one of the pages refers to Armaria vulgaris, which is omitted 

 from the index); on p. 29 the poet "Clare" is referred to as 

 "Clara"! 



We noticed Mr. Henslow's How to Study Wild Flowers on its 

 first appearance eleven years ago, and are glad to see that it has 

 arrived at a third impression. It is well-informed, instructive, and 

 in the main accurate, and provides for the intelligent observer the 

 kind of information in which Mr. Hulme's pretty little book is 

 entirely lacking. This impression contains twelve double-page 

 coloured plates of useful plants, evidently derived from some foreign 

 source, which do not appeal to us. There are numerous helpful 

 woodcuts in the text; we regret, however, to see that the in- 

 accurate naming of these, which in our former notice we ventured 

 to anticipate would "be corrected in the next edition," continues. 

 There seems no excuse for continuing to label as Daphne Mezereum, 

 Gentiana Pneumonanthe, Euphorbia Peplu$ % and the like, figures 

 which certainly do not represent those species, nor for retaining the 

 erroneous derivations given for "London Pride " and "Danewort 

 and such misprints as u Catsia" for " Cassia" (in the index) should 

 have been corrected. The index hardly deserves the favourable 

 estimate we expressed in our former notice ; the Latin names are 

 excluded from it and appear by themselves in a table at the 

 beginning of the book ; some, e. g. Linnaa, are included in neither. 

 We hope the book will be read through for the correction of these 

 and other errors — e.g. the Linnaa is not now "represented on the 

 wall of the staircase of the Linnean Society's rooms " (p. 129) 

 which, though not of the first importance, detract from its value. 





Progressus Rei Botanica. Herausgegeben von der Association inter- 

 national des botanistes, redigiert von Dr. J. P. Lotsy in 

 Leiden. Bd. I, Heft 2, 8vo, pp. 319-532, tfc. 24. Jena: 

 Fischer. 1907. 



This second part of the Progressus contains three communica- 

 tions. Dr. L. Laurent, of the Marseilles Museum, contributes an 

 account in French of the progress of angiospermic paleobotany 



