¥ 
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE. 
[THIRD SERIES.] 
Arr. XVLIII.—Some points in Botanical Nomenclature; a Re- 
view of “Nouvelles Remarques sur la Nomenclature Botanique, 
par M. Alph. de Candolle,” Geneva, 1883; by AsA GRAY. 
SIXTEEN years have passed since M. de Candolle laid before 
the International Botanical Congress held at Paris, August 
16-26, 1867, a body of Laws of Botanical Nomenclature, 
which he had drawn up for consideration by that assembly. 
The code was discussed by a special committee, afterward by 
the Congress in full session, some modifications introduced, and 
it was then all but unanimously voted, “ by about one hun 
dred botanists of all countries: “That these Laws, as adopted 
y this Assembly, shall be recommended as the best guide for 
omenclature in the Vegetable Kingdom.” The adopted Code, 
With an extended Commentary, was published by DeCandolle 
early in the autumn of the same year; and an English Trans- 
a made by the lamented Dr. Weddell, appeared early in — 
The “ Laws,” but without the more voluminous ex- 
planatory commentary, were reprinted from the English trans- 
lation in this Journal in July of that year, occupying only 
twelve pages; and some remarks and suggestions by the 
present writer were appended. As was then said, the code did 
hot make, but rather declare, the common law of botanists. It 
announced principles, systematically and perspicuously, and 
Indicated their application in leading cases; but many prac- 
tical questions, as well as conflicts of rules in particular in- 
Stances, which would inevitably come up, were necessarily left 
Am. Jour, _ Serigs, Vou. XX VI, No. 156.—Deo., 1883. 
, 
