THE B.4.VA'*X4.V BOTANIST-LIBRARIANS. 
I 19 
To Robert Brown, Esq., most learned in the practical knowledge of botany, 
and in the very refinefl and scientific parts of it in particular, with a mind com- 
[)rehensive and acute, and with friendship equally liberal to the author, must be 
attributed the improved state of the latter volumes of this work. Much new 
matter has been addeil by this gentleman, and some without reference to his 
name ; but the greater part of his able improvements are distinguished by the 
signature of Brown mss.* 
Speaking of this work [Aiton (W.) "Hortus Kewensis.” London, 
1789. 8vo. Ed. 2, by W. T. Aiton. 1810-13], Daydon Jackson says 
of it — “ Much of the descriptive matter was contributed by J. Dryander 
as far as Dodecandria, and thenceforward by R. Brown, many of whose 
genera were published in it.” 
It would be desirable to issue an official list of plants in the “ Hortus 
Kewensis,” which are to be attributed to Solander, Dryander, and Brown, 
respectively. A number have come to be attributed to Aiton, 
apparently simply because they were published in the work which 
bears his name. 
Brown’s largest and most important treatise is of course his 
“ Prodromus Flone Xovie Hollandife ”1 (1810), a remarkable work, 
and the eulogy of it by Sir .Joseph Hooker is quoted at p. 111. An 
e.xtract says : — 
In point of novelty of plant forms and structures which it de.scribes, accuracy 
in details, precision of language, wealth of observations, and far-reaching views 
of classification, it maintains to this day the unique position whicli was assigned 
to it on its appearance. 
I sear<;hed the Edinburgh Review and failed to find the “hostile 
criticism.” I accordingly applied to .Mr. Hemsley. of Kew, and Mr. 
Britten, of the British Museum. Following is Mr. Hemsley’s reply: - 
VVe have searched, Mr. B. U. Jackson has searched, and .Mr. .1. Britten has 
searched in all probable publications of the period, and nothing has been found 
to confirm the tradition of hostile criticism of H. Brown’s latinity. The reason 
why he did not continue was probably the absurilly small sale. 
The Director of Kew (Lieut. -Col. Prain, .M.D.) was so kind as to 
send me the following e.xtracts bearing on the subject; — 
. . . nor is there at i)resent any encouragement for works on natural history, 
so that the first volume of Brown’s “ Prodromus Flone Xovte Hollandiae," a most 
scientific work, finding no sale whatever, he has stoj)t short. (I^jtter dated 4th 
February, 1817, written by Francis Buchanan.)]: 
• " Hortus Kewensis,” Aiton. Vol. v. Postscript. 
t Xot only were the commencing and concluding parts of the ” Prodromus ” never printed, 
hut the published volume was withdrawn from sale very shortly alter its appearance. This 
circumstance is mentioned in the cloge pronounced on Brown by Martins, who adds that it was 
owing to a hostile criticism of its latinity that a peared in the Rflin'ruiyh Iti-nietr. In the 
translation of the cloge, communicated to the .iiiniilx ami Maiiaziim nf Satmal llintori/ (for 
-May, 1859), by the late Prof. Henfrey, it is stated that the “ Prodromus ” remained in the hands 
of the |)ublisher for many years. I may add that in 1856 Mr. Brown informed me that the “ Pro- 
dromus " was printed by himself, costing him about tlOO, and after about twenty-six copies 
were sold at 18s. each, he recalled all the remaining copies. 1 made a note of this at the time 
(1856), and inserted it in a copy which he gave me in 1839. (Hooker’s Eulogy.) 
f Life of Francis Hamilton (once Buchanan), in .4 h;i. Roy. Rot. (latd., Calcutta, x, p. xxviii. 
