THE FERN BULLETIN 



71 



botanists" have their say about it. All in favor of the 

 motion please say "aye." We hear nothing but "nays" 

 — or pehaps one or two neighs and brays may be de- 

 teted. The motion is lost. 



Once we were inclined to follow those Vienna ad- 

 herents who shouted "priority" but we soon disovered 

 that we ran a big chance of buying a gold brick. If 

 we favor any further priority it will have to be so se- 

 curely nailed down that it cannot be pried loose. If 

 priority is a good thing let us have it undiluted, let us 

 go back to Adam at once. That is one way to beat those 

 priority people who are approaching the same end by 

 degrees. 



The changes made in our fern names by adhering 

 to absolute historical priority are not as many as might 

 be supposed. The greatest changes are in the author 

 citations rather than in the names themselves. As an 

 evidence of the truth of this statement it may be inter- 

 esting to run through the list of fern names as they 

 would appear if real priority were followed. 



The order in which the ferns occur would no longer 

 be called Filices or Filicales. The names of the families 

 would remain as at present but the order would be- 

 come Dorsiferae of Rivinius. 



Our common sensitive fern would be found in the 

 genus Angiopteris of Mitchell and while the ostrich 

 fern, often classed with it, would remain in the genus 

 Struthiopteris of Cordus it would get a new specific 

 name and be known as S. cordi; thus vanishes Mat- 

 teucia and Onoclca as generic names and Gcrmanica 

 ' as a specific appellation. 



The absurdity of maintaining the genus Filix for 

 Cyst opt oris is shown when it is known that "filix" 



