238 Alphonse DeCandolle. 



manifest themselves for the first time in a family, and are to be 

 regarded as individual variations. This briefest possible analysis 

 of the volume on History indicates sufficiently the wide range of 

 DeCandolle's inquiries, but it cannot give even an intimation of 

 the marvellous charm of style of which he was a master. 



We turn now to a consideration of his Phytography. A work 

 designed to give instruction in methods of describing plants 

 would be thought necessarily technical and dry. But every page 

 of this work possesses attraction not only for botanists but for 

 students in all fields of thought. The methods which he deals 

 with are applicable, mutatis mutandis, to other branches of sci- 

 ence. He gives many hints as to methods of accumulating facts 

 from different sources, and imparts as far as one can do so, the 

 secret of winnowing wheat from the chaff. He lets us into the 

 mysteries of his cabinet, in which he stored myriads of facts for 

 his systematic treatises and for his geographical botany. Our 

 readers will hardly agree with all his views as to the relative 

 value of different appliances for botanical research, but every 

 one must be struck by the fairness with which personal views are 

 presented. 



In 1883, appeared his treatise on the Origin of Cultivated 

 Plants. This has been translated in the so-called International 

 Series and is doubtless familiar to all of our readers. It illustrates 

 the extraordinary scope of his observation and reading, and his 

 judicial method. 



We have deferred until the last a notice of his Laws of Botan- 

 ical Nomenclature. At the Paris International Botanical Congress, 

 held August 16-26, 1867, he presented for consideration a system 

 of rules to govern botanical nomenclature. This body of laws 

 was discussed first by a special committee, and then by the whole 

 Congress. With some modifications the system was adopted. 

 The Code, accompanied by a commentary, was published by De- 

 Candolle that autumn; sixteen years later, he published (1883) 

 amended laws, together with some suggested changes, and a con- 

 cise review of the discussions to which the laws had given rise. 



Article 15 relates to the vexed question of priority. It reads, 

 " Each natural group of plants can bear in science but one valid 

 designation, the most ancient, whether adopted or given by 

 Linnaeus, or since Linnaeus, provided it be consistent with the 

 essential rules of nomenclature." According to this, DeCandolle 

 would make for generic names a fixed date, 1737, that of the pub- 

 lication of the first edition of the Genera plantarum : while 

 species should date from the publication of the first edition of the 

 Species plantarum, namely, 1753. 



Carried out to its logical conclusions and without regard 

 to conservative and traditional usage, this has opened the door 

 to the introduction of what may well be deplored as unnec- 

 essary confusion. That which was dreaded by many has already 

 happened : already there are at least two schools among those 

 who have cut loose from traditional methods and have adopted 





