284 
REVIEW. 
Dec., 1889 . 
There are also certain rules for citation which it is desirable to 
follow. (The writer may take this opportunity of pleading for forgive¬ 
ness for his own sins of omission and commission.) For instance, a 
capital must be used for any specific name which pre-Linusean 
writers had used as an appellative or in a generic sense. For instance, 
we should write Scabiosa Succisa, L., Anthyllis Vulneyaria , L., Lysimachia 
Nummularia, L., Andromeda Polifolia, L. 
The use of varietal names again is by no means correct. Very 
many plauts described as species have their author’s name attached, 
as though they had called them varieties, e.g., under Rosa, var. sub- 
globa, Sm., var. glauca , Vill., &c., were originally described as species, 
and called Rosa subglobosa, Sm., Rosa glauca . Vill. It is more correct, 
therefore, to write var. subglobosa (Sm.) or var. R. subglobosa, Sm. The 
more correct way being to use the first varietal name by which it was 
called and its author; thus—var. subglobosa, Baker. 
Here, too, we must express our regret that so little attention has 
been paid to the critical forms or even well marked varieties, nor is 
the distribution of the species at all thoroughly worked out. For 
instance, under Chara vulgaris two localities are given. Is it such an 
extremely rare plant in Derby ? 
Many of Mr. Purchas’s notes are extremely interesting. So, too, 
are the remarks upon Salix undulata, by Dr. Buchanan White. 
Ehrhart, not Ehrhardt, and Doll, not Dole, are the correct names for 
the two botanists mentioned in it; and, later on, Hackel is mispelled 
Haeckel. It is the botanist, not the philosopher, who described the 
Festuca variety capillata, which had, however, a previous name, Gaudm 
having called it var. paludosa in the Flora Helvetica. 
Under Salix fragilis, L., a variety britannica is given, but no 
reference is made to Dr. Buchanan White, nor is any synonym of the 
species itself given, so we are left uncertain as to whether the record 
refers to S. viridis, Fries, or to S. Russelliana, Sm. 
Under Melampyrum pratense L., var. ericetorumfT). Oliver, is given. 
Has this been seen by Mr. Painter or any competent botanist ? 
“ Topographical Botany ” is frequently the only authority given 
for the occurrence of a species in the county. This is not very satis¬ 
factory. It would have been by no means difficult to have obtained 
Mr. Watson’s authority for their insertion in that work. Take, for 
instance, “ CeplialantJiera grandiflora, Bab.” (or, as it should be called, 
C. pallens, Richard, = G. grandiflora, S. F. Gray), Mr. Painter gives 
“ Top. Bot. No authority.” In the list of books quoted as used for the 
purpose of compiling the Flora, Mr. Painter includes the New 
Botanists’ Guide, by Mr. Watson, and the Botanists’ Guide, by Turner 
and Dillwyn. The plants in the latter book, Mr. Painter states, were 
taken from Pilkington’s Account of Derbyshire. On referring to 
