BOTAXY OF TUB VOYAGE OF THE " EXDEAVOUE.” 
39 
explored in 1769 and 1770, by Lieutenant J. Cook, Commander of His 
Majesty’s Bark ‘ Endeavour,’ engraved by J. Bayly. These maps, 
which render reference to the locahties whence Banks and Solander 
collected exceedingly easy, are reproductions of those which were 
issued with Wharton’s ‘ Captain Cook’s Journal ’ (1893). 
(Then follow some notes on the svnonymy adopted by Mr. Britten). 
'■ As I Nvrite, (1905) the International Botanical Congress (adjourned 
from Paris, 1900), is meeting at Vienna, and. as the result of its deliber- 
ations. it is to be hoped that we shall have the authority of such an 
influential Congress for a settled nomenclature. When this Congress 
reports, the names proposed in the present work will be passed in 
review.* 
•• Mr. Britten tliroughout the work, doubtless rightly, attributes to 
Banks and Solander plants for which in many instances Solander was 
originally quoted. He says : 
careful study of the various memoranda and .MSS. preserved in the Department 
of Botany makes it clear that Banks, who had come to be regarded as a patron of 
science rather than as a man of scientific attainments, had much more botanical 
knowledge than was at one time supi>osed. 
In conclusion, the publication of these fine folio volumes simply 
whets the appetites of Australians for more. We yearn for the publica- 
tion of Solander’s and Brown’s manuscripts, and trust that they will 
not be kept back from any considerations of nomenclature of species. 
Such a reason, if advanced, seems to us inadequate in the case of 
priceless historical documents of the deepest interest to Australians. 
We would have liked our fathers to have had the privilege of seeing 
them ; shall the privilege be denied to the living, and only be bestowed 
on a generation yet to be born? With all respect to the eminent 
specialists forming the scientific staff of the British Museum, we feel 
sure that these manuscripts must contain observations which can 
only be fully interpreted and appreciated by Australians.” 
Mr. James Britten comments on this paper in the following words : — 
My attention has been called to a notice by Mr. J. H. Maiden (Journ. Proc. 
Aoi/. -Soc. ,Y.S. ll'n/e.*. xxxix. 34-39) of the Illustrations of .Australian Plants.” 
which, jierhaps, calls for some comment. Mr. Maiden sjteaks appreciatively of the 
imjiortance of the work, and kindly of my share in its publication; he not unrea- 
sonably takes exception to certain proposed changes of nomenclature, some of 
which would not have been suggested had the decisions of the Vienna Congress 
been arrived at at the time the "Illustrations” was issued. 
I think, however, that some of Mr. Maiden's remarks show a somewhat imperfect 
appreciation of the facts of the case. For example, he says: — 
“ That the copper plates of the present work should have remained in the British 
Museum unpublished for nearly 130 years is a remarkable occurrence, and shows 
how leisurely the progress of British science can be. While grateful for its belated 
appearance it seems difficult to believe that this most regrettable dela}- has been 
unavoidable.” 
• This promise was carried out in Joum. Roy. Soc., X.S.W., 1906, in a paper entitled " The 
International Rules of Botanical Xomenclature.” 
