
          on so slight grounds. You did not give me the author
 of Azolla & for a long time I sought the word in the Genera
 Does not the whole matter of Botanical etymology need to
 be taken up in a work by itself? By taking all the names
 made by the same author together, & reserving the hardest
 authors [crossed out: to] [inserted: for] the last I think there are few names so fanciful
 but they would come, especially when aided by what
 [crossed out: light history] historical light could be obtained & a
 knowledge of the species from whic                      h the name was
 drawn. Conjecture should not be let loose. As a specimen
 (& a very moderate one) of what it will do see my note
 to Dr Gray on [Morrita?]. I write it to him, first to
 save you trouble, & 2nd to take the opportunity to say some
 other things. If you prefer you can embody what it says
 in your letter & then you need not send the note.


 [Stephouns?] thinks [Greek name?] is not a primitive He derives
 it from [Greek name?] under the impression that Lolium is
 degenerated wheat or from [Greek name] as it must be
 taken away from the wheat in cleaning it. But this belongs
 rather to Classical etymology than Botanical. Botanical 
 etymology is history with its chasms filled by conjecture,
 generally certain - sometimes remote. General Etymology
 is all conjecture except a few words like [Macadamise?].


 I reckoned without my host as to the L. I. trip. That
 conscienceless boat charges 4) or 5) each way


 If you hear further from the Am. Ed. of [crossed out: Regne?] the 
        