a§6 



Necessity for Quoting the Name of a Collector. 

 The necessity for quoting the name of a collector with his specimen is often 

 misunderstood. It is not to glorify the collector, although if there is any slight kudos 

 thus to be gained he deserves his share. But the use of the name may help us to 

 trace further particulars concerning the plant in question. The collector is named 

 John Smith, let us say, and if we turn up his name in, say, my " Records of Australian 

 Botanists," the only series of papers dealing exclusively with the biographies of such 

 worthies, we may find a reference to a journey or a place of residence, or a work 

 written by John Smith which may help us to learn more about the specimen in 

 question. For example, in Mueller's Fragmenta, I have often come across the name of 

 a man, scarcely more than incidentally mentioned, which gave me the clue to trace 

 valuable information. 



Although not a very good example, take {Frcujm. ii, 38, under E. Preissicma), 

 Mueller's absurd contraction " Mx," which is at p. 34 " Maxw.," and which is a 

 shortening of Maxwell. These two references show that he collected at the Salt and 

 Fitzgerald Rivers. My " Records of Australian Botanists " give some idea of the 

 journeys these worthies made, and the fact that one of them was at this and that 

 locality may be of distinct value in showing that he may have collected a certain plant 

 there. At all events, it helps us in compiling his itinerary. 



It has been my duty for many years to name plants collected by officers of 

 various Government Departments. Not only have I had to battle against the vague 

 localities sometimes furnished, but also against omissions in supplying the names of 

 collectors. Some heads of Departments do not seem to understand that, as regards 

 scientific specimens, it is a standing rule that the name of the collector should be 

 quoted wherever it is available. This gives credit to the finder (whether he wants it 

 or not), it contributes to precision, and it eliminates circumlocution, to the extent of 

 rendering a man's official designation unnecessary. It may be sufficient to say John 

 Jones, Croajingalong (and this may give a clue, in after years, to the travels of a 

 definite human being), but to say collected by the Protector of Aborigines or the 

 Officer authorised to certify to Marriages of Minors, with or without his town, is exas- 

 perating. Some persons seem to me distinctly averse to disclosing a subordinate's 

 name, except on my application. In speaking thus plainly, on behalf of official 

 recipients of scientific specimens for the public collections, I do not think that the 

 heads have any feeling in the matter ; they are unaware that they are doing any harm 

 — their unscientific action is simply the botamcally uninformed official way. It is 

 also most important to give the date, or approximate date, when the specimen was 

 collected. I need not go into the reasons here. 



5r 



Ecology. 



One's information in regard to a plant is one-sided, unless one has met it in the 

 bush. In that way alone can we see the nature of the soil, the drainage, the aspect 

 it prefers, and its associates ; in other words, what is its status in the republic of plants 

 in a smaller or larger district, in a State, in the very continent itself. This can only be 

 done by travel.. 



