276  .      London  Botanic  Gardens.  { Amjune?i906.arm* 
work  does  not  even  go  to  the  length  of  dividing  his  list  into  two 
sections,  but  he  adopts  the  alphabetical  arrangement  throughout, 
and  this  non-committal  attitude  was  also  assumed  in  1722  by 
Joseph  Miller  in  his  Botanicum  Officiate,  by  Rand  in  his  second 
Index  (1739),  and  by  Philip  Miller  in  his  Dictionary  (from 
1724  until  1759).  The  influence  of  both  Ray  and  Tournefort 
is,  however,  clearly  perceptible  in  these  earlier  editions  of  Philip 
Miller's  Dictionary,  that  of  Tournefort  predominating.  The  old 
print  ot  the  garden  published  in  1753,  and  reproduced  on  Plate 
XXV,1  throws  a  considerable  amount  of  light  on  the  disposition  of 
the  plants  in  the  garden  at  that  date.  The  arborescent  plants  are 
located  together  in  two  plots  ("The  Wilderness  where  many  kinds 
of  Trees  grow"),  there  is  a  "  place  where  the  Physical  Plants  are 
placed  alphabetically,"  the  "  Bulbous  Rooted  Flowers"  have  a  sec- 
tion to  themselves,  the  "  Annual  and  Biennial  Plants"  occupy  an- 
other section,  and  the  "  Perennial  Plants"  complete  the  list.  Except 
in  the  case  of  the  medicinal  plants  there  is  no  indication  given  of 
the  way  in  which  these  various  groups  are  classified,  but  it  is  inter- 
esting to  note  that  the  division  into  arborescent  and  herbaceous 
plants  is  common  to  the  systems  of  Ray  and  Tournefort,  and  that 
the  u  Bulbous  Rooted  Flowers"  probably  correspond  to  those  of  the 
twenty-first  book  of  Ray's  Historia  Plantarum,  "  qui  est  De  Herbis 
radice  bidbosa  donatis  Usque  affinibus!'  The  section  devoted  to  me- 
dicinal plants  also  suggests  several  points  of  interest.  We  find,  in 
the  first  place,  that  this  collection,  which  was  by  far  the  largest  one 
at  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century,  now  forms  but  a  rela- 
tively small  part  of  the  varied  contents  of  the  garden,  and  we  also 
perceive  that  the  alphabetical  arrangement  which  had  commended 
due  to  a  confusion  of  the  Index  with  a  later  catalogue  by  Rand  entitled 
Horti  Medici  Chelseiani  Index  Compendiarius  [etc.],  and  published  in  1739  ; 
for  the  author  (Semple),  in"  his  description  of  the  latter  work,  states  that  "it 
would  appear  from  some  pages  in  the  biography  of  Mr.  Philip  Miller,  that  Mr. 
Rand  prepared  this  Index  in  consequence  of  his  feeling  hurt  at  the  publication 
of  the  Catalogue  of  the  contents  of  the  Garden  by  the  former,  who,  as  Mr. 
Rand  considered,  had  encroached  upon  his  province,  he  being  the  Prsefectus 
Horti  and  Botanical  Demonstrator  while  Mr.  Miller  was  the  Gardener."  The 
confusion  has  doubtless  arisen  from  the  fact  that  the  original  "  Memoirs  "  by 
Henry  Field  are  silent  on  the  subject  of  Rand's  second  catalogue. 
1  I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  H.  Howard  Batten,  the  clerk  to  the  Trustees  of  the 
Chelsea  Physic  Garden,  for  the  loan  of  the  block  from  which  this  plate  was 
printed. 
