﻿55 



its ways. For the ways of Hepaticology are difficult and perplexing. 

 The standard text-books are now out of date; a bewildering 

 synonymy has arisen, owing to the numerous startling changes of 

 nomenclature, and the vexing claims of priority of publication; 

 the best of the more recent works are fragmentary ; and the mani- 

 fold additions to, and revisions of, the subject are widely scattered 

 over periodical literature of several years. What is sadly needed 

 is a good handbook, comprising all the native species gathered 

 together from outlying literature, referred to their modern genera, 

 and accurately described and figured ; with the synonymy and 

 various opinions of authors reduced to order, and the terminology 

 simplified and rendered uniform. It should, moreover, contain a 



Such, then, being the chief 

 features of the ideal handbook, what is the nature of the provision 

 made by Dr. Cooke ? 



Dr. Cooke, who is chiefly known for his mycological researches, 

 is a prolific author, who has addressed himself to a great variety of 

 subjects. This is not the first time he has treated of the Hepatics. 

 In the year 1865 he published in connection with Science Gossip his 

 Easy Guide to tlie Study of British Hepaticce—a, cheap little work 

 containing short descriptions, with illustrations, of all the species 

 (136 in number) known at the time. In the preface to the present 

 work he tells us that he has been reluctantly prevailed upon to 

 expand the Easy Guide into a Handbook. He now gives us 200 

 species arranged in 50 genera. The most glaring faults of the 

 earlier compilation have been removed — for instance, the Antho- 

 cerotacea have been separated from the \la>rhantian;r, : and most of 

 the figures condemned by Gottsche (Hedicigia, 1866, pp. 100-103) 

 have been either suppressed or transferred to less unsuitable 



from Gymnanthe Wilsoni and Scapania irrigua respectively. There 

 are a few native species which Dr. Cooke "has failed to include in 

 his Handbook, and among these may be mentioned Bazzania 

 Pearsoni Stephani (Hedwigia, 1893, p. 212)— the publication of 

 which, however, may have been too late for admission into Dr. 

 Cooke's text ; Cephalozia Jackii Limpricht [Revue Bryologique, 1883, 

 p. 91); Fossombronia Dumortieri and F. cristata of UndLbevg(Hepaticai 

 in Hibemia, Act. Soc. Sci. Fenn. x. (1875), p. 533); Riccia ciUata 

 Hoffm. and R. minuta (whatever that may be), recorded by Car- 

 rington in Trans. Bot. Soc. Edinburgh, xiii. Append, p. xxii. 

 Further, it may be pointed out that Pellia endivmfolw Lindb., 

 being always dioicous,, should be separated as a species from 

 P. epiphyUa Corda (Handbook, p. 249), which is monoicous; and 

 that Aneura sinuata Dumort. is regarded as a true species by 

 Stephani (Hedicigia, 1893, p. 137). 



Dr. Cooke (p. 83) cannot find sufficient warrant for maintaining 

 Jungennannia socia Nees as a British species ; and he is probably 

 right. As to Jungennannia excisa Dicks., he quotes Spruce and 

 Carrington in evidence of the non-existence of that species in this 

 country, but he has overlooked Lindberg's note (Muse. Scand. (1879), 



