difficult group, as the two alternative names are both published here 

 for the first time post*»1753, We must, I think, assume that the Linnaean 

 names are those accepted by the author, and therefore the others are rele- 

 gated to synonymy. Of the 270 unassigned names a part must be rejected 

 as the generic names correspond to terms currently used in morphology 

 (Art. 20), such as Arbor , Lignum , Radix , etc. These number , 

 leaving names still to be considered. Of these some are identical 



with aiready published generic names , such as Saponaria and Capraria. 

 These are probably to be regarded as later homonyms, unless they can be 

 shown to be based on the same types as the Linnaean names , The other 

 uninomials are generic in form and there is no apparent reason for not 

 regarding them as validiy published generic names , Of the remaining, 

 some hinomials , e.g. , Arundo farcta , beiong to genera appearing in 

 Linnaeios Genera Plantarum ed, 5, regarded as published in 1753, hence 

 are vaiidly published names , Of the remaining names , are mono- 



typic. Thus , their descriptions are to be regarded as generic-specific 

 in the sense of Art, 42, making them also validly published generic and 



