6 
The question they should ask is: what was the first work on Bryo- 
phytes, on Lichens, on Algae, on Fungi, in which those groups were 
scientifically and comprehensively treated. 
It is not possible to enter at this time on a general consideration of 
this point. Although that part of Linnaeus’ Species which related to 
Bryophytes appears to have greater value than that which relates to 
Thallophytes, since for one reason his citations of Dillenius’ figures 
help one to understand to what plants the brief descriptions were 
applied, it must certainly be admitted that Hedwig’s Species Mus- 
corum, of which the first volume appeared in 1801, is the fundamental 
work on mosses and that Hedwig with whom the scientific study of 
mosses begun may be called the Linnaeus of Bryology. Acharius 
stands in the same relation to lichenology and it is a question to be 
settled by lichenologists whether the Lichenographia Universalis of 
1810 or the earlier Methodus is to be given the preference. For 
algae, the. Systema Algarum of C. A. Agardh has been suggested. 
It is, however, out of the question to refer more in detail to the groups 
just mentioned but it will be sufficient if we consider the case of fungi 
somewhat more minutely although the subject is perplexing and 
complicated even to those more particularly interested in this group 
and probably to others wearisome. 
In the Species Plantarum 1073 pages are given to phaenogams; 
15 pages only are given to fungi, including Agaricus 27 species. Boletus 
I2> Hydnum 4, Phallus 2, Clathrus 3, Elvela 2, Peziza 8, Clavaria 8, 
Lycoperdon 9, and Mucor 11. To these must be added 3 of the 
species of Tremella placed by Linnaeus in algae, making 89 fungi in 
all. Of these not one is extra-European and only 8 are cited as grow- 
ing in Italy or Southern Europe. To consider that a work of such a 
limited scope should serve as a basis of nomenclature of a group whose 
species are numbered by thousands seems to me preposterous. All 
that we can say of the fungi in the Species Plantarum is that they show 
plainly that in 1753 next to nothing was known of that large group and 
one may be pardoned for saying that in what Linnaeus wrote about 
fungi he was not a Linnaeus. We must search elsewhere for a funda- 
mental work on the subject. In the later editions of the Species and 
the Systema Vegetabilium, as I have said, the treatment of fungi is 
