The Florida agriculturist., 1907-11-27

al Science and Religion-the botanist
Gray, I mean: "In the hrst place,
much of the popular idea OF the dis
tinctness Of all species rests on tal-
lacy which is obvious enough when
once pointed out In systematic works
every plant and animal must be re-
ferred to some species, every species
is described by such and such marks,
and in the books one species is as good
as another. The absoluteneSs Of spe-
cies, being the pOstulate OF the science,
was taken for granted to begin with;
and so all the forms which have been
named and admitted into the books as
species are thereby assumed to be
completely distinct. All the doubts and
uncertainties which may have en-
barrassed the naturalist when he pro-
posed or admitted a particular species,
the nice balancing Of the probabilities
and the hesitating character Of the
judgment, either do not appear at all
in the record or are overlooked by all
but the critical student. Whether the
form under consideration should be
regarded as new species or should
be combined with others into more
generalzed or variable species is a
question the naturalist has to decide
for the time being, often upon insuffi-
cient, and always upon incomplete
knowledge and increasing knowledge
and wider observation generally raise
full as many doubts as they SETTLE
The patient and plodding botanist
spends much of his time in the en-
deavor to draw specific lines between
the parts Of series, the extremes OF
which are patiently different, while the
means seem to fill the interval.
Some one when asked if he believed
in ghosts, replied: No, he had seen
the making and unmaking of far TOO
many species to retain any over-ween-
ing confidence in their defniteness
and stability. I believe in them,
certainly. do not agree that they
are shadows, not substantial things,
but [ believe they have only relative
hxity and Importance"
Here, for instance is a genus Of
composites once named Coreopsis (it
looks like bug). The dozen or more
species are fine plants and all was
lovely until some one renamed the
genus Calliopsis Gt looks beautifully.
Here is a state Of affairs until you find
the first botanist was looking at the
ripe seeds-the common name Of some
of the species being tickseed, while the
second saw the bright flowers. In
this case [ can remember that the
seeds look like bugs, while the flowers
are beautiful. So it does not worry
me SO much as it might the two names
being as far as they go in the nature
of description of the plants But
I have wished a thousand times that
plants once named could stay named
If nature would issue labels for all her
forms, it would settle things, provided
that we could learn to read her Ian
guage and another remedy about
equally hopeless would be for the
interior Or Agricultural Department
to appoint commission to revise the
list and establish and publish an official
catalogue not trying like DR.. Gray, TO
settle every nice point, but to give the
layman a rough and ready govern
ment name, and so in time the race of
sucking botanists who imagine their
glory grows with every new name they
coin might be exterminated
E. S. Gilbert
New York.
Mr.. Gilbert has plainly set forth the
reasons for the conflicting names of
plants. We will illustrate by relating
an instance from Our own experience.
Possibly we may have told it before,
but it is such clear demonstration of
the fact that species are variable and