— 8o— 



dilatatum" should be Hornemann, 1827, and not Hooker, 1830. 



Under the treatment of genera old landmarks disappear so 

 rapidly that one becomes dizzy in trying to find the way without 

 them. The displacement of century-honored names is carried out 

 in some cases on the flimsiest of pretexts, as in the case of Swartz's 

 Anemia, which is better left undisturbed, there being no evidence 

 to show that Bernhardi's Ornithopteris was published first. Its 

 appearance in Swartz's " Index" is not such evidence, as its pres- 

 ence there might be accounted for in other ways. In fact Dr. 

 Underwood himself has supplied a reasonable explanation by ad- 

 mitting the existence of intervals of time between the printing of 

 portions of Swartz's " Synopsis" and "Index." 



The substitution of Strnthiopteris for Lomaria, Matteuccia 

 for Strut hiopter is, Filix for Cystopteris, Tectaria and Phanero- 

 phlebia for Aspidium, as well as several other similar changes, 

 is to be seriously challenged, but it would require more space than 

 the limits of this criticism will permit of to enter into any discus- 

 sion here. I apprehend, however, that few fern students will be 

 willing to adopt such changes. 



It is not a pleasing task to make adverse criticisms. One 

 would much rather utter words of praise; especially when, as in 

 the present instance, one holds an author in high esteem. The 

 work itself has been admirably done, and, if judged solely from 

 the author's point of view, may be considered as a successful and 

 praiseworthy performance. The citations bear evidence of pains- 

 taking efforts to insure accuracy, and the author is to be congrat- 

 ulated on the success of this portion of his work. It is, however, 

 much to be regretted that he should have followed so closely the 

 lead of another instead of giving to us more original work, and it 

 is quite certain that he has just missed, at the very beginning of 

 his promising career, a splendid opportunity to secure recognition 

 on a permanent basis. 



Following the Bulletin's suggestion of last summer, I studied 

 below the ground and found a root of Dryopteris intermedia that 

 was as large and tough as that of a shrub. The curious revela- 

 tion to me was its miniature fac-simile to the frond itself. In 

 using the knife I had split it for some inches. Doubtless other 

 seekers have discovered the same appearances, but they were new, 

 not only to me, but to all who examined the root as it was on ex- 

 hibition on my porch.— F. L. Know I ton, Danville, Vt. 



