- 32 - 
In that particular part which is introduced by a copious index of the 
literature, the author, in all concerning the system, agrees almost entirely 
with Schimper. The descriptions of the systematic groups of greater or 
smaller extent as well as of the species are carefully and critically drawn up 
and are less minute than in Limpricht's well-known work, With the species, 
•account is also taken of their synonyms and briefly of the geographical exten- 
sion. Unfortunately there is wanting a “ clavis ” which in the genera 
specially rich in species would have been very useful. 
The illustrations which are all from the author’s own hand, and are 
reproduced by photo-lithography, refer chiefly to anatomical details, leaves 
and sporogones ; but with the smaller species are also found habitat pictures. 
Of course it is just these drawings, executed with so much pains, that give 
to the work its greatest value. As regards the printing, the book is very 
handsomely gotten up, and the price ($1.00 each part) must be considered' 
extremely moderate. 
We congratulate the author upon this beautiful work, and are convinced 
that it will win for itself many friends. 
Helsingfors, Finland, Sweden. 
SOME ERRONEOUS REFERENCES. 
J. Franklin Collins. 
Some erroneous references which appear in Limpricht’s Die Laubmoose 
have been quoted by Prof. Holzinger in his article on page 8 of the January 
Bryologist. It may be well to call attention to these and also to others in 
connection with Hymenostomum which appear elsewhere. As the errors 
are identical— translation excepted— in both Prof. Holzinger’s article and in 
Limpricht’s work, I will refer directly to the former as the latter will proba- 
bly be inaccessible to a majority of the readers of this article. 
In regard to Hymenostoinum it is stated that “ The authors of the Bryol- 
ogia Germanica (1823) emphasize its affinity with Weisia viridula." 1 In the 
work mentioned, Theil I, page 191 (1823), the relationship with “ Weisia 
controversa ” is emphasized, while W. viridula is not- mentioned anywhere 
on the nineteen pages (188-206) devoted to the genus Hymenostomum. 
Practically, this may be of little importance as W. controversa is now 
usually regarded as a synonym of W. viridula. 
Near the middle of page 8 in The Bryologist it is stated that in the 
Bryologia Europaea “ H. rutilans (Hedw.) is made a synonym of Weisia 
mucronulata Bruch, and H. subglobosum Bryol. Germ, a synonym of 
Weisia viridula-. further, H. rostellatiun is treated as an Astomum, and by 
error H. crisfcatum Bryol. Germ, i's also removed.” Turning to the Bryologia 
Europaea, Fasc. 33-36 (1846), one notes firstly, that H. rutilans is made a 
synonym of Weisia mucronata Bryol. Eur. (not of W. mucronulata Br. ): 
secondly, that H. subglobosum does 7iot appear as a synonym of Weisia 
viridula\ and lastly, that it is Phascutn (not Hymenostomum ) rostellatum 
which is treated, Fasc. 43 (1850), as an Astomum , although one of these may 
