Jure 
! h, 
' y (’far Pr. Pchl echter; 
1 ** sorry to hm del ayed so Ion? with 
t-hi’s letter, but ir.y mind has been taker up rith a ?re&t many 
thtnfs ard your letter redardi r.f my surest iors as to genera 
irade re fee] that It fr u ] J be rise for re to refrain fro m 
rr 1t j r ? until after T had had tire to think roll. J rant to 
e liberal in try treatment of botanical matt era, yet: J air lir ._ 
able to bri r? myself to the point at. rhi'ch I sn* r ry individ¬ 
uality. /I though 7 resjrert your rprior and have a dreat. ec~ 
irir at i or for you c*a r acity, it would be r.ac'rese for me to enter 
into a co-oj oretive -ork which would misrepresent ny views and 
result in fiVirj* a rror.j' impression of ny reactions to the mod¬ 
ern tendencies in By atera tic botany that are leacinf to chaos. 
I may be very much ir error in my attitude and a victim ®f too 
dee I seat f^orvict ions, but you would be the first to concern 
re if I simply adopted, without serious discussion, conclusions 
which,, in the final analysis*, are merely a matter of personal 
opinion and always subject to successful attack as time passes 
and our knowledge increases. Your letter h.uft me because it 
indicated a lack of sympathy. Your only concession wan a cbarfe 
in the spell i r\? of a generic name. Your determination to di'sre- 
i'ard my opinions was not eased by convincing or kindly argument. 
Vbis brings me to the synopsis of t he genera. T believe it 
w o t) 1 d be a ? r eat mi stake t o publish this in its present pt ate, be 
c c u n e it if incomplete arc roods tc be careful 1 y r e v j s <J’d . Further 
more, would it not be best for you to bri n? this out separately? 
I ask the question because 7 fear it would be mistake to include 
a. <* rub! i cat, lor as t he system of ore author untouched 
^ UU P*vX-A.-« U'h it. for you ir Crchicaceae VII. 
