THE BANKSIAN BOTAHIST-LIHRARIANS. 
II3 
These are the reasons that have decided me in retaining the earliest name, and 
with a conviction of tlieir sufficiency, I do not see liow consistent either with 
respect to you, or to myself, I can change it. I have still another reason, but 
though it has weight with me, 1 do not put it in the scale because I am aware it 
is not unmixed with selfishness. My friend .Mr. Uryander, who has already 
adopted Ilakea in his catalogue, intends I am certain, to continue it in the edition 
of “ Hortus Kewensis,”* now preparing for the press, and you will very readily 
believe that my determination, especially if unsupportetl by reasoning, will have 
very little inMuence with him. Now I confess, that as several of my new species 
will appear in the New Catalogue, I am, on that account, more than usually 
anxious to coincide with him. 
You may be assured that in all cases I am most desirous to adopt your decisions, 
sensible that where 1 have the misfortune to de])art from them I incur no small 
risk of committing myself, and I trust you will consider it unnecessary for me 
to add, that wliere I am induced to differ from you cither as to names or structure, 
I am not likely to do it in terms calculated to hazard your friendship or esteem. 
But among such a number of objects which different ob.scrvers will often contem- 
plate under very different points of view, occasion d diversities of opinion will 
necessarily occur, and a few such indeed there are in my paper already mentioned. 
These I could wish when you come to town to submit to your inspection previous 
to anything being determined ui)on resj)ecting its publication, and I now hasten 
to conclude, &c. (Signed) 
H. Brows'. 
Smith to Brown. Norwich, .January 14tli, 1810. 
I fully intended preparing my |)aper on Bnuioniaf (is not that the best name 
for it?), for ne.xt Tuesday, but independant of some things that I couhl not 
postpone, 1 have been unusually interrupted by visitors last week. Y^ou may 
depend on it by the bth of February. I have ha|)pily this winter had no inter- 
ru|)tions from headachs or other indisposition, .so that my Flo. Brit, and Laplan 1 
Tour are in a thriving condition. 1 thank you very much for your kind com- 
munication. as 1 wa.s, for many reasons, anxious to stand godfather to your genus. 
On one [wint chiefly I beg to offer a suggestion, though with the deference due to 
your suiKudorJ knowledge in Nat. Orders. This genus seems to me a true 
Dip-weed anti havdn-.; truly a flon inferni. it confirms the propriety of .Jussieu’s sug- 
gestion. p. MO Obs. line 7, &c., that " perhaps the outer calyx in Dipsaceoe is 
inferior.” In studying the Scabioste of FI. Graeca I have had occasion to weigh 
this matter. It seems to me that Brunonia is a Dipsacea with a perfectly inferior 
flower, while in Dipsacus, &c., the calyx and base of the corolla are more or less 
united into a spurious kind of pericarpium. I need not point out to you the 
lights which Marina, Valeriana, and thence the Rnhiace'e and C wi/mhiferfe throw 
on the subject. As to habit, see how striking an affinity there is between your 
two species and the Saibiosa creticu and ijraminifolia of Linns. I shall be anxious 
till I hear your opinion. 
I thank you and my good friend Uryander for what you propose abt. Wahlen- 
berg’s remarks. I shoidd gladly accede to it, were the Lapland Tour likely to 
appear very soon. The 1st vol. is jirinted, but what with the wood-cutter, the 
printer, ami the tediousness of the translating and composing the whole, the 
•2nd vol. can hardly be done these six months. 
• Referred to in speaking of Dryander, supra, p. 9 I. This is additional evidence, already 
alluded to, of Dryander’s responsibility for the botany of a portion of the work that is called by 
Alton’s name. 
t In honour of Brown. S nith’s paper was “ ,\n .Accaunt of a Xew fJenus of New Holland Plants 
named Brunonia.” iTrans. Linn. Soc., .x, .36.'>'. 
t .A compliment to the profuniiity of Brown’s knowle.lge from one of the first botanists of the 
day. 
H 
