COMMENTARY. 65 



parenthesis and anything that may follow will be neglected, 

 and that! -we should merely have Mulgediwm alpinum L., 

 Asterothrix Hispanioa WiUd., etc. ? What becomes then of 

 the history of botany ? Is it not altered and violated ? And 

 on whom can the fault be thrown but on those who have 

 introduced this dangerous system ? 



M. Kirschleger again takes up the pen in 1860, and says, 

 in the ' Bulletin de la Societe Botanique ' (vol. vii. p. 437) : — 



" I believe in the necessity of restoring a multitude of 

 species to their true authors and owners. Botanists write, 

 Cota altissima Gay, and not Linnaeus. What merit has M. 

 Gay in this case ? He has established the genus Cota (good 

 or bad, no matter) . Let him, then, enjoy the whole honour 

 that the genus may shed upon him. But what pretensions 

 can he have to the epithet altissima, which belongs to Lin- 

 nffius or to Tournefort ? It is of the species that I am 

 speaking, not of the genus ; and if I write, "Cota Gray ; altis- 

 sirtia L. (sub Anthemide) ," I have at once given to each his 

 due of justice, glory, and merit. If this notation be found 

 too long, — ^in a catalogue, for instance, — ^the name of the au- 

 thor of the new genus may be left out, and that of the au- 

 thor of the species put into a parenthesis." M. Kirschleger 

 adds ironically, " The orthodox notation has the immense 

 advantage of encouraging authorities," by which he impHes 

 fwihis and nohises added to long-standing names, or the sa^ 

 tisfaction of seeing one's name in print. 



The Publishuig Committee of the Botanical Society 

 answered in the following article of the ' Bulletin ' "(vol. vii. 

 p. 438) :— _ 



" The Committee^ think it right to preserve without any 

 alteration whatsoever in the Society's publications the nota- 

 tion to which M. Kirschleger gives the name of orthodox (that 

 is, the ancient notation). This regular manner of iadicat.' 

 ing the name of the authors of Orders, genera, species, 

 or varieties, consecrated by its adoption, in the two most 



' This consisted of MM. Cdsson, Duchartre, and Prillieux. M. de 

 SchcBnefeld, Secretary of the Society, took likewise an active part in 

 the declaration of the Committee. 



