PREFACE, Vii 
consult my Contributions towards a knowledge of the 
Burmese Flora, in the course of publication by the 
Asiatic Society of Bengal.’ 
As to the vexed question of nomenclature, I confess 
myself an admirer of, and adherent to, the Botanical Laws 
as laid down by the International Botanical Congress at 
Paris in the year 1867, and published by Professor Alph. 
de Candolle. These are translated into nearly all modern 
languages, and are now generally adopted in Europe, 
exceptat Kew. However, I have deviated in several cases 
in favour of Hooker’s Indian Flora, or kept up old estab- 
lished names, not because I assent to such irregularities, 
but simply because I thought it not fair that I, a Ger- 
man, should introduce my individual convictions into a 
practical work written solely for the use of English people. 
In my Contributions above referred to, I have endea- 
voured to follow strictly the path of law and logic. 
The botanical terms used are those generally in 
vogue, but I have preferred (so far as my limited ac- 
quaintance with the English language has allowed me to 
do so) to use English terms in preference to anglicised 
Latin ones. A new term (czé) is introduced here and re- 
quires explanation. It is well known that Indians con- 
tinually use their wood-cutting knives (dah, parang, or 
whatever name the various peoples give to them) for 
cutting into the bark and sap-wood of trees. By so doing 
they recognise the species in the depths of the forests, by 
a combined observation of the nature and colour of the 
bark or the wood and of the juice or milk that exudes 
1 Four parts have passed through the Eas me three or four more parts will 
conclude the work so far as the phanerogams a rned. 
