REPORTS OF* SOCIETIES. 



21 



Imder the presidency of M. de Candolle,who 

 delivered his inaugural address in French. 

 Treating firstly of the advantages of horti- 

 culture to botany, he said it appeared to 

 him that gardens could be made still more 

 useful in carrying out physical researches. 

 In the course of his address he farther re- 

 marked : — Two years ago I made a request 

 to theFederationdes Societes d' Horticulture 

 Beiges, Vv-hich appears to have been favour- 

 ably received, and it may not be useless to 

 repeat it here. It consisted in begging 

 the horticulturists who obtain new varieties 

 not to give them botanical names, with a 

 Latin designation, but merely arbitrary 

 names of quite a different nature, in order 

 to avoid confusion and useless researches 

 in books. For example, if they called a 

 Calceolaria, Sebastopol, or Triomphe de 

 Grand, every one would understand it 

 meant a garden variety ; but if they 

 liamed it Lindleyi, br mirabilis, the student 

 would take it to be a botanical species, 

 and would search for it in scientific works, 

 or in the Floras of Chili ; and botanists, 

 happening perhaps to mistake it, would 

 add it to the end of the genus in their 

 books as a species imperfectly known. The 

 more horticultural names difl'er from Latin 

 ones, the better it is, unless they can be 

 appended to the scientific nomenclature, as 

 when we say Brassica campestris oleifera, 

 instead of, shortly. Colza." 



Papers were afterwards read by Dr. 

 Moore, " On the Climate, Flora, and Crops 

 of Ireland," by Prof. Caspary, " On the 

 change in the direction of the branches of 

 "Woody plants caused by low degrees of 

 temperature," by Mr. J. E. Howard, "On 

 the present state of our knowledge of the 

 species of Cinchona," and by Prof. Karl 

 Koch a paper containing some propositions 

 with respect to systematic botany. 



The following is a summary of this im- 

 portant paper : — "Three especial sources 

 of difiicnlty beset the systematic botanist 

 of our day : First, the confused nomencla- 

 ture : Second, the scattered literature : 

 Third, the distribution of great numbers of 



plants by nurserymen under fanciful names. 

 One man can do but very little to remove 

 these obstacles, but a congress of botanists 

 and horticulturists will be better able to 

 effect the necessary changes and improve- 

 ments. Professor Koch proposes to obviate 

 the confused synonymy by retaining the 

 specific name first given ; but as regards 

 the generic name, to place that which 

 recent investigation has adopted first, and 

 the one by which it was first described 

 afterwards in a parenthesis. If an author's 

 name be given, it should be that of him 

 who first described the plant. Our nomen- 

 clature begins with Linnaeus, and hence all 

 botanists prior to him are to be disregarded. 

 Secondly the scattered literature. Bota- 

 nists now a-daj^s write in German, French, 

 English, Italian, &g., and in a large num- 

 ber of different periodicals, so that it 

 becomes very difficult, or next to impos- 

 sible, for a man to make himself thoroughly 

 acquainted with the literature of the sub- 

 ject. Prof Koch proposes, therefore to 

 select a number of botanists from various 

 countries to examine and collate the sepa- 

 rate publications of their several countries. 

 A general editor is to be appointed in a 

 European town where there is a good 

 library, and all extracts are to be sent to 

 him at that place. The general editor is 

 to arrange these extracts scientifically and 

 to publish them in the Latin language. 

 Thirdly as to the importation of plants by 

 nurserymen. No disadvantage would 

 ensue if the horticulturist were to adopt a 

 provisional name in the first instance, said. 

 then apply to a botanist for the correc 

 name, which could then be published ; buL 

 in adopting this plan there are two difficul- 

 ties to be encountered. Gardeners would 

 seldom take the trouble to change the pro- 

 visional for the scientific name ; and they 

 would not always know which botanists 

 studied particular families, or would not • 

 venture to trouble them. This ought, 

 therefore, to be the task of a Botanico- 

 Horticultural Congress. Fourthly, many 

 botanists have already devoted themselves 



