genus Hygrophorus, that the gills are decurrent. Although this is true 
of many conspicuous species, so that an incorrect impression is easily 
gained by an unobservant person, it is by no means universally or even 
generally the case. Examination of some common species, H. miniatus , 
H. puniceus, H. conicus , and H . cklorophanus , for instance, will show an 
entirely different state of things. A few pages further on we are told 
under Lepiota procera that “ there is no poisonous species for which it 
can be mistaken, if one bears in mind” its structural characteristics. Has 
the author never heard of Lepiota Morgani , a dangerous species, which a 
tyro would easily mistake for L. proccra ? Another source of dissatis¬ 
faction with the descriptions is their extreme scantiness in some cases. 
The characterization of some genera is so slight as to amount to nothing 
at all; examples are Pholiota, Panaeolus (“black, ovoid spores, cap 
smooth and not striate, a fleshy stem ” ), Physalacria (“ small, simple, 
hollow, and enlarged at the apex”), Lachnocladium (“ leathery plants 
covered with hairs ”) and Trametes. 
The discovery of other inaccuracies and omissions of this kind must be 
left to tbe readers. One conspicuous tendency to misinform the unin¬ 
structed must however be mentioned. We all know the popular difficulty 
caused by Latin names. Recognizing this, the author, as her preface 
states, makes a point of marking the length of vowels and the place of 
accents. If her desire has been to record prevalent errors in the pronun¬ 
ciation of Latin, she has been remarkably successful. But she should 
have been surer of her ground before setting models that, if they have 
any effect, will tend to confirm some illiterate usages and establish others 
quite new. Whatever may be said of generic names, which often, as in 
the case of the American pronunciation of Coprinus , permanently escape 
from the control of the laws of quantity, there will never be but one cor¬ 
rect way to spell and to accent specific names when they are formed by 
Latin adjectives. In spite of Miss Marshall, then, and those whose usage 
she records, it is incorrect to say r&dicans, calOpus , edulis , velutinus , 
proccra , caesarea and albidum , just as truly it is incorrect to write 
velutipas or cretaceous. This sort of thing becomes ludicrous when for 
Fdvolus alveolaris (the original spelling) is recommended Favdlus 
areolarius. 
The best thing about the book is the series of plates, around which the 
text is built. They are from the work of Mr. J. A. and Miss H. C. Ander¬ 
son, whose colored photographs have been much admired. Only a few 
of these (Armillaria inellea , Clavaria formosa , Boletiuus pictus, 
Calostoma cinnabarinum, , for instance) fail to do justice to the plants. 
The rest are admirable. It is a noteworthy performance to have the three 
species of Calostoma, so long disputed, clearly differentiated on one 
plate. Yet the plates have been badly handled. They are not num¬ 
bered, and some species are far removed from the places where they 
occur in the text. 
It -would be pleasant to find less to say in condemnation of a work like 
“ The Mushroom Book.” Its publishers are pushing it hard as the best 
book on the market. It is said to be selling well, and there is reason 
to fear that it is. 
Attention may also be called to the following books, not previously 
mentioned in the Bulletins. 
