394 SCIENCE TEACHING : EXAMINATIONS 
that hypothetically it was so, then you had better say ' an 
unfolded leaf.' I have suggested ' flat or concave ' with 
* unfolded ' in brackets. 
I do not at all agree with the terms Milkworts, Tutsans, 
etc., as Enghsh equivalents for natural orders, seeing that 
the same name more often appHes to the genus only and 
most properly. MalloAvs are Mallows, and their family or 
order, the Mallow family or Mallow order. Mallow -worts 
means nothing — wort not being a recognised equivalent of 
any value, generic or ordinal. I think that by introducing 
such terms you lose all the little point English names have 
and gain nothing whatever. What is a wort ? in English 
surely not a tree, to justify Mast-worts, more especially as 
mast is an equivalent to wort, in one sense. Wort I believe 
means weed or Jierh. I am still all for Crowfoot famity (or 
order). Mallow family, etc., etc. 
You will have a little difficulty to adapt a good name 
for all, but any genus contained in this family will be right, 
whereas the introduction of wort is wrong in grammar and 
more wrong in science. Let one of your pupils ask j^ou to 
explain why you say an Oak belongs to the Beech family, 
or Nut family, or Hornheam family, or any other contained 
genus you may adopt, and you can explain at once, rationally, 
and shew that the name conveys definite information — but 
what conceivable excuse have you for calling a nut a mast- 
wort ! wrong in sense, in English, in sound, and in science. 
I think such terms are a retrograde step in the progress 
of sound elementary education. ' There then,' as W^illy ^ 
says. It would be further exceedingly important to desig- 
nate the Nat. Ord. in Enghsh, by the same genus or term 
as the Latin ordinal name is derived from — thus ' Cruci- 
ferae,' and ' Cupuliferae ' = ' family of cupped fruits,' and 
* Primulaceae ' = ' family of Primrose.' You could thus 
explain both the Latin mode of giving ordinal nameS; 
together, and save much complexity and loss of time and of 
no little confusion too to young ideas, the only explanation 
needed being that there is no English inflexion that answers 
to the Latin ' Primulaceae ' — in English it must be expressed 
by the word order or family affixed or postfixed. Better 
than all this would it be to tell them that the}^ can no more 
^ His small son, nov/ aged two. 
