« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »
in modern scientific labours, which are cannot escape the imputation of arrotoo often swelled by pride into thick gance, which is now cast on them by quartos, at the expense of the purchaser, Mr. N.; and Linnæus, Adanson, Necker, without any material advantage. These Scopoli, Jussieu, Decandolle, Robert qualifications, united to the adoption of Brown, Cassini, Rafinesque, &c. who have the English language, and the vulgar all laboured, or are yet labouring, to give Linnæan system, throughout the work, us a complete plan of natural orders, will probably entitle it to the character of must be considered as arrogant writers ! a popular manual. The author informs us Happily no enlightened botanists will asin bis preface, that it was in deference sent to this assertion, and we wish it may to public opinion tbat he adopted them; bave escaped Mr. N. inadvertently rabut we regret that such a deference was ther than consciously, carried too far; as it has obliged him to We perceive that this work is very far change altogether the plan which he from deserving the title of a mere compiwould otherwise have pursued in the clas. lation, like so many of its kind; but is sification of our plants. Mr. Nuttall is a the result of the practical observations of zealous adınirer of natural affinities; he the author since 1809. has in some instances added much to our We may therefore deem it a valuable knowledge of the peculiar affinities of addition to botanical knowledge, whensome genera, and he evinces a partiality ever the author has had an opportunity to for the beautiful results of an inquiry in- observe the genera and species he mento the philosophy of botany. He might tions; but this has not always been the therefore have greatly increased the value case, and in such an extensive country as of his work, by displaying in it the series ours could hardly be expected. Mr. N. of natural order, and families already de-, has been a great traveller, as every tected in the United States, and bringing practical botanist ought to be; he has a knowledge of them to a level with the visited particularly the regi watered understanding of students and amateurs; by the Missouri, and has ascended that but be has preferred the convenience of noble stream as far as the Mandans. His the sexual system, because it is generally discoveries in that quarter are recorded in taught, as yet,among us, and its false bases this work; some of them had been comare more easily recorded in the memory municated to, and published by Pursh, in of common readers. We forbear to en- his Flora ; but they now appear in a large on this subject, else we might have more correct form. We regret, however, too much to say; but we cannot dismiss that Mr. N. takes so little notice of Mr. it without remarking that if every writer Bradbury, who visited the same river at should follow this example, no improve the same time, and made also many inment would ever be adopted in science, teresting discoveries, several of which and knowledge would remain stationary. bave been published by Pursh, and some
We are greatly surprised to find the are now described by Mr. N., and we are following passage in Mr. N.'s preface. acquainted with many more, unnoticed by " The great plan of natural affinities, either of them, and totally new. Most sublime and extensive, eludes the arro- of the new Missouri plants of Mr. N. gance of solitary individuals, and requires had also been collected by Mr. Bradthe concert of every botanist, and the bury; but this fact is unnoticed in this exploration of every country towards its work, while it ought to have been recompletion.” If every attempt to collect corded, in justice to Mr. Bradbury's the knowledge acquired by the exertions zealous exertions and modest merit. of observers, is to be styled an arrogant Our author evinces in soine instances a attempt, when natural affinities and the striking neglect of the labours of some improvement of botany is the ultimate previous writers, which were evidenty object, then the first botanists of this age within his plan. Ile las, for instance, Vol. IV, No. 111.
omitted all the new genera of the Flora of Philo.terus, R. r. Louisiana by Robin and Rafinesque; Borkauasia, Munch, &c. those of Desvaux, Decandolle, &c. and
Forty new genera are proposed, some those mentioned in former numbers of of them very properly, and even on new this work; or he has given them new plants ; but one half of them have receivnames, thus encreasing the confusion of ed objectionable names, and more than botanical nomenclature. We shall not twelve are not new, since they had alattempt to state our surmises on this sub- ready been established under diffeject; but, whatever may have been Mr.
rent names. It must be a matter of N's motives, they ought to have been great regret that so many authors are stated, since a total silence might induce daily increasing the perplexity attending us to believe that he was ignorant of such the delightful study of botany, by propoaccessions to our knowledge, or unwilling sing new genera without endeavouring to to notice them ; either of which suppo- become perfectly acquainted with those sitions reflects no credit on him.
established already, whence so many geReassuming our perusal of his work, nera acquire two or three names; but in we find thatřit is not a mere description of such a case, the anterior name, if good, our genera; but an enlarged survey of must always prevail. Another source of them. After the botanical English names great confusion is, that different genera of each gedus follows a correct definition receive very often a similar name from of it, in the style of Jussieu, with obser- different authors; in this last case, the vations on the habit and peculiarities of first genus established must retain the it. Next a catalogue of the species name, and the second receive another. kgowo, or supposed to be known, to the These are invariable laws, and those who author, including many new ones, of do not know them, or do not attend to which full descriptions are given; and
them, are not to be considered as bota. lastly an account of the number and ge- nists. It will not avail, as a pretext to ography of the foreign species belonging frame bad names, that many eminent to the same genus. Therefore the whole authors are falling every where into the includes a more correct account of our
same predicament, and that some of them genera than had ever been published.
begin to think names of so little imporThe additions to botanical knowledge tance that they scarcely attend to the conveyed by this work are various, and rules of botanical nomenclature; this include the discovery and establishment baneful errur must be corrected, and the of many new genera and species, new obe useful fabric of universal botanical noservations on old genera, the introduction menclature must not be left to fall into a of some genera as American, and some
new chaos, sirnilar to, or worse than that remarks on the properties of plants scat- from which Linnæus retrieved it. Whattered throughout the work. About twelve ever be at present the conflict of opinions genera are introduced in the American on the subject, we shall at all times stand Flora which had been alrcady detected advocates for the purity of nomenclature, elsewhere by other botanists; they are
since we consider the whole science of Phyllactis, Persoon,
botany as intimately connected with it ; Bruchmannia, Jaquin.
and whatever be the annual accretion or Polypogon, Derf.
bad names, we do not despair of extricaPennisetum, Richard.
ting the science from the chaos of their Orthopogon, R. Brown, Dantbonia, Decand.
synonymy, and we are satisfied that a peJegilops, L.
riod must come when good names and Koeleria, Pers.
previous names must prevail over had Orobus, L.
names and secondary names, and these Trigonella, I
latter be eliminated for ever. Crinun, I
The real noir gencra introduced be
Mr.N. are Enslenia! Pterospora, Ortho- Maclura !!
Xoxylon, the carpus, Polypteris, Balduina ! Those
[same. detached from former genera are very Sheperdia !!
Hippophae. numerous; they are generally founded on About ten sub-genera are also proaccurate observations and are very distinct posed, many of which might, with profrom those genera, from which they are priety, have been marked as genera, they now separated with great propriety. Mr. N. bas, however, thought proper to apo- Strepsia, sub-genus of Tillandsia. logize for these innovations to those who Euosmus,
Laurus. deem irnproper any improvemet v pro- Gymnocaulis,
Orobanche. posed by real observers, although it is Atalanta,
Cleome. by such gradual improvements that the Coenolus !
Erigeron sciences acquire maturity and perfection. Chrysopsis !
Inula, We should zhave seen with more satisfac- Eustemia
Solidago tion an apology for the adoption of unwar. Microstylis,
Malaris. rantable bad names, or for the old genera Aplèctrum !
Cerallorhiza. given as new. We shall iodicate these Plilophyllum,
Myriophylerroneous names, or genera, by this mark!
[lum, &c. or !!
The whole number of genera enumeLeplandra ! ! separated from Veronica.
rated in this work is about nine hundred ; Eriocoma,
Stipa. and no cryptogamnious genera are given Tralepsis,
Aira. except the ferns! We are exceedingly T'indsoria,
surprised to perceive, that, although the Oxydenia,
author's aim is to give us a complete acCollomia,
- Phlox. count of our genera, he has omitted at Androcera!!
Solanum. least one hundred and fifty of them well Anantherix,
Asclepias. known to us, among which are to be inStylandra,
Asclepias. cluded about twenty naturalized genera: Chondrocarpus,
Hydrocotyle. While we see in this work the genera Crantzia,
Do. Lolium, Stemerocallis, Arctium, &c., Erigenia,
which are evidently naturalized, and givUraspermum !!
Scandis. en as such, we look in vain for Borrago, Thaspium,
Smyrnium. Nigella, Brassica, Symphytum, Vesicaria, Mahonia,
Berberis. Anethum, Molucella, Althea, TragopoGyromia,
Medeola. gon, &c. which are in the same predicaLyonia !
Andromeda. ment! Aboit twelve genera, mentioned Diumorpha !
Sedum. by Muhlenberg as Datives of the southern Stylophorum
Chelidonium. states and Florida, are likewise omitted ; Synandra,
- Lamium. such as Tuchsia, Amyris, Coccoloba, SeEuchroma,
Barisia. suvium, Maurandia, Clusia, Tordylium, Epifagus !!!
Orobanches Swictenin, &c. Slanlıya!
Cleome. The following American genera of vaOplotheca,
Gomphrena. rious authors appear to have escaped Mr. Wistaria !!
Nuttall's notice, or to have been neglectBrachyris,
ed by bim, although equally good, as any Trichophyllum,
- Actinella. of his new genera ; many more may be Leplopoda !
- Gala, 'ia. in the same situation unknown to us at: Actinomeris !
- Coreopsis. present. Triphora,
- Arethusa. Podosemum, Desvaux. Tipularia!
- Orchis. Campelosus, Desv. Carya!!!
Juglans Graphephorum. Desv.
new genera, some of which Mr. Nuttall Céphaloris, Desv.
has adopted, but with different naines : Luzula, Decandolle.
we refer particularly to our review of Vexillaria, Eaton.
Pursb's Flora, and may quote for inTovara, Adanson.
stance our Odostemun, called since by Lophiola, Sims.
Nuttall Mahonia ! our Torylon, the Ma. Lachnanthes, Elliot.
clura, N! our Lepargyrea, called Sheper. Schubertia, Mirbel.
dia! our Ceranthera, called Androcera ! Tulipa, L.
&c. We assert, and any candid botanist Spartium, L.
will assent, that the honour of establishSideranthus, Fraser.
ing and naming new genera and species Phyllodoce, Sims.
belongs to those who first have the sagaBesides all the new genera of the Flora city to abserve or detect them, and the of Louisiana, Rafinesque, and this journal, ability to give them the first good dames ; to the number of nearly one hundred ! priority of publication deciding in case of
Respecting these it may, perhaps, be any equivocal circumstances. It is under proper to state, that they cannot have es- such evident rules and acknowledged caped the notice of the author ; we are, principles that we lay claim to the genera, therefore, at a loss to conceive why they of which we have binted the propriety, have been neglected. At all events, tbe, and for which we have proposed good fact stamps a character of imperfection names. We shall consider, in future, and illiberality on the otherwise valuable whoever shall attempt to deprive us of work before us, and its value, as a gene
our discoveries and previous names, by ral manuel of our genera, is thereby disguising our genera under different greatly diminished. The Flora of Loui- pames, as plagiarists, and treat them as siana was published by Robin, in 1807 ; such, exposing their unwarrantable conand a translation in English and Latin, duct to the public at large, and the litewherein all the new genera and species rary community in particular; unless we it contains are exactly named and cha- have satisfactory evidence that the auracterized, was published in New-York thors of such attempts were totally unain 1817. "That work is therefore a ne- ble to acquire a previous knowledge of cessary supplement to this. The Euro- our labours; in which case we shall expean genera Acanthus, Peucedanum, and pect that they may be willing to retract Aretia, were introduced, for the first such posterior names, coming in conflict time, in that Flora as American ; and the with ours, as soon as they may become tropical genera Chrysophyllum, Lantana, acquainted with them; but, if they should and Cassine, as natives also of the Uni- refuse it, or neglect it when apprised ted States. About thirty-two new ge- of their errors, we shall deem ourselves at Dera and ten sub-genera were established liberty to expose them in the only light in the same Flora, which are in vain that such a conduct deserves. looked for in Nuttall's work, and among The following genera are those to them the genera Arnoglossum, Bradbu- which we now lay claim, as having been rya, Darwinia, Diototheca, Diplonyr, proposed in our former reviews of botaniDysosmon, Karpaton, Lascadium, Mnesi- cal works, or established in our various teon, Onosuris, &c. deserved particular papers : attention. We find besides thiese a pre. Trisiola.
Polanisia. vious genus Enslenia different from the Leporgyrea. Aplostemon second Enslenia of Nutall, a gepus Hico. Amphicarpon. Bigelowia. rius identic with the Carya of Nuttall, Nemopanthus. Dimesia. &c. !
Pachistima. Polathera. We have established, or proposed, at Ceranthera. Torylon. different times in this journal, several Osmorhiza. Ademarirom
appears that scarcely one hundred have Odostemon. Balduina.
really been discovered by him ; about Megotris. Macbridea.
thirty have been communicated to bim Crinsanthes. Polycodium. by Dr. Baldwin, Dr. Stuve, Messrs. Col. Amblirion.
Leptamnium. lins, Fraser, Whitlow, Bradbury, &c. and Quamasia. . Thalesia.
more than twenty had beeu described beSigillaria,
Disynanthes. fore by Robin, Bigelow, Mublenburg, Arillaria. Ptilepida.
Elliot, or Rafinesque, and ourselves! Yet Styrandra. Ratibida, &c. they are introduced, in the work before Clintonia.
us, as new, and under new pames! The And many more will be now proposed in number of species, described by former the course of our ultimate remarks on the botanists, and omitted in the total enuwork before us.
meration of the species of each genus, Our name is well known to all the bo- amount, on an approximate calculation, tanists of the United States, and they are to about four hundred, including those of all aware that our labours and those of the Flora of Louisiana ! C. S. Rafinesque are identical. We, Among the real additions made to our therefore, take the liberty to lay a further number of species, and now introduced claim, in his name, to all the genera by our author into notice by descriptions, which he has published in the Flora of we may enumerate the following : Louisiana, and to the following, published G. Aster. 6 species. Cactus 3. long ago, (in 1808 and 1814,) in “ The Inula 3.
Silene 2. New-York Medical Repository;" in Solidago 3. Prinos 1. “ The Mirror of Sciences ;” and in the Orchis 3.
Lilium 1. " Account of Discoveries in Zoology and
Oenothera 7. Erythronium 1. Botany."
Scutellaria 4. Trillium 1.
Polygala 8. Pyrola 1.
Gerardia 3. Seymeria 1.
Artemisia 4. Lupinus 1.
Erigeron 3. Mikania 1.
Pentstemon 3. Polygonum 2
Orobanche 3. Pycnanthemum Volocium. Isotria.
Houstonia I. Hudsonia 2.
Lysimachia 1. Vernonia 2.
Evonymus 1. Liatris 3.
Gonolobus 1. Psoralea 2.
Asclepias 1. Hedysarum 3.
Ascyrum 1. Glycine 2. All that is requested of our future wri- Dracocephalum 1. Tephrosia 2, ters is, that they should deal with us, as Castanea 1. Krigin 2. they wish to be dealt with, and not ne- Lobelia 3.
Carduus 2. glect the mass of new discoveries and im- Dentaria 2.
Cacalia 2. provements which it has been in our Alyssum 2.
Tribulus i power to lay before the public; they Orobus 2.
Jussica 1. ought not to be deemed the less worthy Psoralea 2.
Aronia 1. of attention because they are commonly Violn 2.
Rubus I. clothed in a plajo Linnaan garb and style! Rotbollia 2. Delphidium 1.
The same observations and claims ap- Paronychia 2. Lathyrus 1. plv equally to species. We calculate Atripler 2.
Parietania I. that about one hundred and fifty are now Rheria 2.
Lespedeza 1. &c. introduced as new by Mr. Nuttall, in ad- Having now gone through a general dition to the genera; bnt among these it survey of this work, we shall endeavour