EDITORIAL. 



The delay in this issue is due to the fact that the appli- 

 cation for the transfer of our mailing permit from Bing- 

 hamton, N. Y. to Joliet, 111., has been pending for more 

 than three months. This seems to be the last obstacle 

 to our appearing on time and in future we expect to 

 issue the numbers promptly. A great part of the April 

 issue is ready as this is written. Copy intended for that 

 issue should be sent at once. 



It would doubtless be impossible for any body of scien- 

 tists to make a set of rules for naming plants that would 

 be acceptable to everybody else. The Vienna Botanical 

 Congress made several rules that will likely find accept- 

 ance, but there were occasional outcrops of assininity that 

 ought to be attended to at the earliest possible moment. 

 After all this howl about priority of specific names, it is 

 surely a delectable sight to find these eminent scientists 

 solemnly agreeing that what is sauce for the botanical 

 goose is not sauce for the gander. By the Vienna rules, 

 we are still to have priority in specific names, but in 

 varietal names, never ! Take the case of Isoetes Cana- 

 densis. The earliest valid name given this particular 

 quillwort is Isoetes riparia Canadensis. When it was 

 later regarded as a species distinct from /. riparia, it was 

 properly described as I. Canadensis. But while its posi- 

 tion was still in question, Eaton described plants as /. 

 Dodgei, and now by the new rules, we are asked to for- 

 get that the plant's real name is Canadensis and take up 

 with Dodgei again because " species and not varieties are 

 the units of classification." Can anyone believe that this 

 idiotic rule was not made in the interests of a few botan- 

 ists who rely upon its use to get their names into print? 

 If American botanists want to earn a reputation for 

 wisdom, they should promptly repudiate such nonsense. 



28 



