222 



BOOK NOTICES. 



h in 'Hypopithys' where no h ever was — surely the misprint in Hooker's Student's 

 Flora was not slavishly, deliberately copied? — and inconsistent indeed to omit the 

 like letter, and write ' omiophylhis ' (sub Ranunculus hederaceus, 22b) in place of 

 homiophy litis. Lapsana may pass, although Lampsana. is the more classically 

 correct; but 'Laestid.' for Laestad. is wrong. It is mystifying, too, to find, in- 

 stead of the usual contracted indication of the authority for the name, such a 

 negative barbarity as ' Agropyron acutum, non R. and S.', — meant, we presume, 

 to give the direct denial to Hooker (Stud. Flo., p. 504), albeit unable to set him 

 right by stating who is the authority. ' Rumex hybridi, teste Trimen ' is another 

 funny appellation for a group of species ! Stranger still is Silene gallica L. 

 variety ' C. anglico X quinquevulnera, Melvill ' — a hybrid admittedly, yet not 

 accorded the same express treatment as other hybrids in the catalogue. Some 

 few names have no paternity indicated at all ; and the several variations in the 

 citation of authorities are not precisely defined. In the next edition it is to be 

 hoped the genera will be followed by the names of those who erected them. 

 Although technically admissible (owing to a lapsus calami, or inadvertent omission 

 of Salisbury's), Calluna Erica DC. will puzzle not a few ; and all the more those 

 who know Salisbury defined the genus, and must therefore have had at least one 

 plant on which to found it. Ranunculus 6 pseudo-fluitans Bab.' (No. 14) is the 

 same thing as R. peltatus var. 'penicillatus Hiern,' (No. i8d) — a state merely 

 without floating leaves, yet it is lined as a species, presumably quite another thing. 

 This Batrachium section of the genus is very indifferently catalogued, without 

 any evidence of an attempt to educe method out of chaos, in accordance with the 

 natural facts. 



The county census numbers after most of the species-names are said to have 

 been taken from a posted-up copy of the second edition of Topographical Botany ; 

 and it is claimed as a merit that their being so taken 'alone rendered it possible' 

 for this 8th Ed. ' to be ahead of any work yet published ' on the subject. Now 

 it seems to us to be a vicious precedent to seek to establish the private working- 

 copy of any individual, and that individual himself, as a responsible authority, 

 accredited with later or fuller information than anyone else. If the being thus 

 ahead were a fact — which we doubt — it is no distinct advantage, since there is 

 nothing to compensate for the arbitrary indefiniteness, the numbers may be in 

 some cases ahead (or they may not), but how far and in respect to what species no 

 one has the means of ascertaining. It must all be taken on trust, the numbers can- 

 not be verified, nor can those who wish ascertain (since the posted-up copy is 

 private and so far inaccessible) what counties are meant in any case. Take, for 

 example, the seven divisions in which Rynchospora fusca is stated to have occurred, 

 as an instance capable of brief analysis, and therefore, by so much, not likely to 

 bear unfairly on the census compiler. The 2nd Ed. of Topographical Botany 

 gives ' Cornw e. ? Som. n., Dorset, Hants s., and Glamorgan' with ' S. Wales 

 Henslow sp.,' and ' [42, 62, both errors?]' Surrey has been published since that 

 work was issued, and its occurrence in Cardigan (Co. 46) by the Dyfi estuary; but 

 one is left to guess whether the seven areas actually refer to Cornwall, Somerset, 

 Hants, Surrey, Glamorgan, and Cardigan, or to Brecon vice the queried E. Corn- 

 wall. The census numbers, too, are in many instances omitted ; none at all are 

 affixed to the species of Adonis, Rcemeria, to Orobanche minor, to any of the 

 species of Ajuga, nor yet to Atriplices patula, hastata, and deltoidea, nor to Ulmus 

 campestris, nor to Ceratophyllum either as aggregate or segregates ; nor to Thalic- 

 trum flexuosum, Lathyrus tuberosus, Agrimonia (both species), Ribes petr&um, 

 Epilobium lanceolatum, Glaux maritima, Corylus avellana, Bromus racemosus, 

 Lastrea remota, or Equisetum trachyodon ; whilst Asplenium Clermonta and Eqtii- 

 setum moorei should have ' I ' for Ireland only, affixed. 



The census-number (one) given for Arenaria uliginosa, Sisymbrium irio, Slum 

 repens, and Alliicm sibiricum is in every case too low. The first named has been 

 published for two, the second in several (but, perhaps, usually as a casual), the 

 third in four, and the Allium in two divisions at least. On the other hand the 

 numbers affixed to Campanula Rapuncuhis, Pyrola rotundifolia, Epipactis ( pur- 

 purata Sm.' — if meaning violacea — and Scirpus rufus are all too high. 



We notice some other strange errors, but they are possibly inadvertencies: 

 Primus avium is given (without any *) as a true native in 90 division s, which is 



Naturalist, 



