Cv/ 
The majority of the changes in the nomenclature of the Indian plants 
and for the matter fact, of the other parts of the British Colonial Empir 
» j 
are hh£x£ms mostly due, not so much to the priority rule, but to the 
fact that Hooker and his colleagues at Kew adopted what is known as the 
"KEW RULE in preparing the Colonial Floras/This rule not only maintain¬ 
ed that the correct name of a species is the first combination under 
the correct genus, but also permitted one the use of later homonyn or 
even a synonym as a legitimate name for a species simply because the 
particular binomial appeared to them a better or more appropriate name - 
to the species $han any other teawgxsK even older name,It even permitted 
one to accept a later interpretation of spgKiBS a binomial to the preju- 
dice of the original one, and irrespective of the type. This rule haitx 
1SB8H was therefore responsible f,£r much confusion and friction among 
botanists, though it is the influence of Hooker and Dyer, fhe so to say 
the Dictator#Botanists that itj/had 
been able to axsEEiBB carry on i£s exist^ce^so long. It is only after 
■ \ • i> 
\ 
these dictators ceased to exercise any inftjenee that the British Bo- 
tahists began to realise the false position into which they were led 
h 
by their former botanical leaders and so they begaiV to follow the| 
majority of the botanists and to support the priority rule, and later 
ttiXAf OM^u^ud " Ifab /&uj 
in ^s* D/gave fcheir support to the inclusion of the provisior 'in the 
inter ;ional Code governing the/nomenclature.But even prior to the 
Vienna Rules(l 905 ), the majority of the systematise on the Continent,in 
America and even in India were in the favour of the practice of inter¬ 
preting a binomial in its original sense and giving preference over 
•{ 
others to the earliest specific epithet.^ence, it is obvious that those 
who have become long accustomed to the Flora^ emating from Kew resent 
that they should be asked to discard the namaa illegitimate names or 
i 
wrong interpretations and to accept instead names and interpretations 
which are really older and legitimate ones. The schism that is now 
threatened by the British Foresters is no doubt an outcome of wrong 
conceptions on the matter^for it is illegitimate interpretations and 
us/^sfe that they are trying to legalise on the plea that they ha$(>ecome 
very long accustomed to them.Should we revert to the Kew rule again, it 
