﻿272 



shall find " Dimorphic Aralias, 426 " ? The very heading is mis- 

 leading, for the " Scientific Committee " is that of the Royal 

 Horticultural Society, and should appear under that heading, from 

 which, however, it is entirely omitted! Classified headings are 

 only tolerable when the entries under them are also placed under 

 their own names, and when an indication of the classified articles is 

 given at the head of the index. 



The Garden is more satisfactory in this respect. By the use of 

 italics, it is found easy to include the illustrations (which have a 

 separate index in the Gardeners' Chronicle), and the subjects are not 

 classified, so that each can readily be found by referring to the 

 one table. But in both these important papers the names of 

 contributors find no place in the index ! 



In the Journal of tlie Royal Horticultural Society (xv. 1893), the 

 authors are nowhere indexed, and it is impossible to find them save 

 by going through the table of contents. The index is very meagre, 

 and there is no correlation of entries : for example, we have 

 " Aster, the genus, 4." 

 " Asters, conference on, 1." 

 " Michaelmas Daisies, 13, 229." 



„ list of, 239." 

 These should have been brought together under the headings 

 "Aster" and "Michaelmas Daisies." Mr. Dewar's useful key to 

 Sunflowers should also have appeared under Helianthus, and so on. 



The Bulletin of Miscellaneous Information (1898) is curiously 

 indexed. The incidental mention of three species of Rhyncophorus 

 is entered, but the detailed descriptions and plate are omitted. 

 Such curious entries as " Principal Assistant (Cryptogams) " ; 

 " New World, coffee cultivation in " ; " Colonial Botanist, Queens- 

 land " : and many more of the kind, indicate that the compiler has 

 not realised the first essential of an index-maker — the knowing what 

 folk are likely to look for. Margaret Meen, the botanical artist, is 

 entered under her Christian name only. But, most astonishing of 

 all, the numerous new species published in the Btittetin find no 

 entry in the index, the only indication of their existence being 

 under the heading " Decades Kewenses": while forty new orchids 

 are lumped together under " New," no reference being made even 

 under " Orchids " f This is the more remarkable, as a number of 

 references to common plants are given at length — a note on Buck- 

 wheat, for example, is entered three times under that word, three 

 times under Fariopyrum, and once under Kangra Buckwheat. 



Incomparably the worst index I have ever seen, however, is that 

 to Grevillea, vol. xxi., to the startling peculiarities of which attention 

 was called in this Journal last year (p. 224). As a literary curiosity 

 in other respects, this magazine stands High. Did any other, I 

 wonder, ever end a number with an unfinished sentence — thus : — 



"present state of mycological knowledge, the classification " 

 and, six months afterwards, continue the same without a word of 

 introduction by beginning 



"and the description of the species of North American Pyrenomycetes " \ 

 Joubnal of Botany.— Vol. 82. [Sept. 1894.] t 



