﻿80 



THE FERN BULLETIN 



another. Now because Eaton was mistaken we are 

 asked to change the name of the plant, the excuse for 

 the change being that in giving the new name, Eaton 

 disagreed with Engelmann as to the amount of differ- 

 ence between it and the nearest related form. "I. 

 Dodgei must be the name of the species as it is the 

 first name of specific rank the plant bore," may ba 

 good enough logic for those who change names to 

 get their own into print, but the editor's "code" as 

 outlined by Mr. Eaton reads "I. Canadensis must be 

 the name of the species because it is the name first 

 given to the plant," and the editor is ever ready to 

 maintain that if a few botanists can form an "Ameri- 

 can Code" in defiance of the Vienna Code that all the 

 rest of the world has agreed upon, he has quite as 

 much right to form a "Fern Bulletin Code" or an 

 "Editorial Code." This magazine and its editor, how- 

 ever, are not trying to make an impression upon bot- 

 anical nomenclature, but instead are endeavoring to 

 use the terminology that squares most readily with 

 common sense. In the case of the great scouring 

 rush mentioned, we never considered "making combi 

 in this off-hand way" very demoralizing except per- 

 haps to the peace of mind of those who consider 

 nomenclature a god or master instead of a servant. If 

 our critic really believes that "the earliest name re- 

 ceived in its new position must be regarded as valid" 

 we wonder why he takes the trouble to get excited 

 over this "off-hand way" of stringing latin words to- 

 gether to indicate a mere form. Mr. Eaton may, as 

 he claims, have been convinced by the process of elim- 

 ination that the name prealtum applies to the plant in 

 question, but he might have saved himself considerable 

 mental effort by turning to Vol. XL No. 1 of The 



