184—LOOKING BACKWARDS. 
“In my opinion it is the very priority law which defends science 
against these species manufacturers that grow in mushroom numbers. 
If a certain species is unknown to a mycologist, i. e., if it is nova species 
to him , but long before known to science, then it stands to reason that 
the new name as a matter of course is entirely superfluous and non- 
meritorious.” Extract from private letter from Dr. Hollos. 
We fully agree with all this but are afraid we cannot agree with 
what constitutes “making a plant known to science.” Simply picking 
up a plant, calling it something, sticking a specimen away in some 
collection, “describing” it so that others cannot know it from the de¬ 
scription, does not make a plant “known to science.” It simply pro¬ 
poses a puzzle for science to solve. Schweinitz did not make “Bovista 
Candida” known to science. Fries thought it acceded to Eycoper- 
don, Sprengel that it was Calvatia gigantea, Morgan that it might 
be Bovistella Ohiensis. Czerniaiev did not make the genus “Disciseda’ ’ 
known to science. The species cannot be determined to this day and 
never will be determined unless some of Czerniaiev’s plants are found. 
It is put among the “ungentigend bekannte Gattungen” in the recent 
Engler & Prantl. Morgan did make Catastoma known to science He de¬ 
scribed it and illustrated it so that everybody knew it. Hollos knew it 
and was enabled by that knowledge alone to decide that it was the same as 
the genus Disciseda. I knew it and recognized Schweinitz's “Bovista 
Candida” as the same. Now it is working backward, like a crawfish 
walks, and it is not just to Morgan for Hollos to try to break down 
Morgan’s work on what he learned from Morgan any more than it would 
be for me to use what I have learned from Hollos and Morgan and 
break down both their works and call the plant “Disciseda Candida.” 
And yet “priority” upholds it, at least for the time being, until some¬ 
body digs up some other old name. 
185—AN INEXCUSABLE BLUNDER. 
On page 10 of Genera Gastromycetes, and again under fig. 19, page 
14, we have written Nidularia striatus forCyathus striatus. This was 
simply a lapsus pennae. The genus Cyathus is the most frequent genus 
of Nidulariaceae, and we have some half dozen species in this country. 
Cyathus striatus is the most common species. We have only one col¬ 
lection of the genus Nidularia, some specimens kindly sent us by Dr. 
Herbst. In this connection we trust all our readers will bear in 
mind that we are particularly anxious to obtain specimens of 
“bird nest fungi” ; and will not fail to pick up and send us all that 
they find. 
100 
