^T. 77.] TO DR. BRITTON. 813 



Sunday Evening, November 27, 1887. 



Dear Dh; Britton, — I wish to call your attention 

 either in a personal way or in the " Bulletin," if pre- 

 ferred, to a name coined by you on the 223d page of 

 this year's " Bulletin." 



" Conioselinum bipinnatum ("Walter, Fl. Car. under 

 Apium), Britton, Selinum Canadense, Michx., 1803." 



I want to liberate my mind by insisting that the 

 process adopted violates the rules of nomenclature by 

 giving a superfluous name to a plant, and also that in 

 all reasonable probability your name is an incorrect 

 one. 



Take the second point first. On glancing at the 

 " Flora of North America," of Torrey and Gray, 1, 

 619, where the name Conioselinum Canadense legiti- 

 mately came in, you will notice that the name Apium 

 bipinnatum, Walt., is not cited as a synonym ; also 

 that the synonymous name of Cnidium Canadense, 

 Spreng., is cited with " excl. Syn." This Apium bi- 

 pinnatum, Walt., you might gather was one referred 

 to. Sufficient reason for the exclusion by Dr. Torrey 

 might have been that Michaux's plant is a cold north- 

 ern one, which nobody would expect in or near Wal- 

 ter's ground — the low and low middle part of Carolina. 

 Besides, the preface of that "Flora" states that 

 Walter's herbarium had meanwhile been inspected by 

 Dr. Torrey' s colleague, who may now add that the 

 Apium bipinnatum is not there. So that the name 

 you adopt rests wholly upon a mere guess of Spren- 

 gel's, copied by De CandoUe, dropped on good grounds 

 by Torrey, but inadvertently reproduced in Watson's 

 " Index," copying De CandoUe. I suppose you would 

 not contend that a wholly unauthenticated and dubi- 

 ous (I might say, doubtless mistaken) name, under 



