Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

applied to one variety it will be impossible, without outside help, to determine which is the older, unless both are published in such a way that the date of their distribution is known. This provision, in pomological experience, applies most sharply to the catalog of the mediocre nurseryman. This man finds it too expensive for his business for him to issue a catalog every year, so he makes one catalog do for several years by the simple expedient of omitting the date. Yet this is, unfortunately, the very style of nurseryman who is always introducing new varieties with flamboyant, unsuitable, and ill-considered names.

The provision that the "book, bulletin, report, trade catalog, or periodical," in which a new variety is published, shall be "generally distributed among nurserymen, fruit growers, and horticulturists," has its obvious meaning and justification.

Rule 5, the rule against revision, is redundant, purely negative, and unscientific. There is no real necessity for it. The four rules previously given cover all the ground. Yet the fifth rule is perhaps needed for emphasis, and the emphasis can not be too great in view of current practice in this matter. A some

A

what amusing case of the present time may be mentioned to enforce this statement. certain famous Western plant breeder has originated many good plums, and the variety which seems to be the best production in all his life's work was named Free Silver, because the man was an ardent advocate of the free coinage of the white metal at a ratio of 16 to 1, and a loyal supporter of William Jennings Bryan. Now, after this variety had been advertised for about two years under this name, and had been distributed to some extent, the entire stock remaining in the hands of the originator was bought up by one of the best, most careful, and conservative nurserymen in the United States. But this man is a rank Republican and a gold-standard man from start to finish. Whatever his horticultural principles might be, his political principles. would not permit him to advertise, praise, and circulate anything under the name of Free Silver. So he unhesitatingly renamed the plum, calling it Terry. Yet this man is a high pomological official, and, more than any one else in the country almost, interested in upholding the rules. Unquestionably his provocation was very great.

XII

AMERICAN POMOLOGICAL SOCIETY RULES

IT has already been pointed out that the foregoing Lazy Club code of rules has no official standing. The only pomological rules which do have are those of the American Pomological Society, adopted many years ago. These rules are as follows:

I. The originator or introducer (in the order named) has the prior right to bestow a name upon a new or unnamed fruit.

2. The society reserves the right, in case of long, inappropriate, or otherwise objectionable names, to shorten, modify, or wholly change the same when they shall occur in its discussions or reports, and also to recommend such names for general adoption.

3. The name of a fruit should preferably express, as far as practicable by a single word, the characteristics of the variety, the name of the originator, or the place of its origin. Under no ordinary circumstances should more than a single word be employed. 4. Should the question of priority arise between different names for the same variety of fruit, other circumstances being equal, the name first publicly bestowed will be given preference.

These rules were adopted in 1883. They

were apparently intended chiefly to guide the American Pomological Society in its official proceedings, in its fruit exhibits and in its published reports. Only here and there do the rules give one the feeling that the men who framed them expected them to have any force or application outside the society. In this respect they differ essentially from the Lazy Club rules, which were designed to express the fundamental laws of nomenclature as applied to pomology.

It is evidently easier to make rules for a society than for the whole world, and inestimably easier to enforce such rules. But, ideally, the rules of nomenclature should rest on universal laws, or, at least, the rules themselves should have universal recognition. Perhaps the best expression of this point was the one given long ago, written, I believe, by De Candolle, saying that science "can make no real progress without a regular system of nomenclature, acknowledged and used by a large majority" of the men engaged in a given line of work.

Another closely related principle was expressed by the same writer in these words: "The rules of nomenclature should neither

be arbitrary nor imposed by authority. They must be founded on considerations clear and forcible enough for every one to comprehend and be disposed to accept." *

If these principles should be accepted as the foundation for pomological nomenclature we should feel that the American Pomological Society or any other organization or institution could not do more than to formulate a code and recommend its adoption. No one would be bound to follow that recommendation nor to use the code, unless the majority of pomologists chose to use it. Then it would be the force of custom, acting in recognition of general principle, and not the force of any society's dictum, which would prevail.

The rules given above are of great interest, however, under any view, as showing the ideas of nomenclature current, or recently current, among American pomologists.

With respect to Rule 1, it may be said that

* From the laws of botanical nomenclature adopted by the Congress of Botanists at Paris, August, 1867. For a full and instructive résumé of nomenclatural rules, including botanical, zoological, and ornithological codes, the student may consult Sudworth's "Nomenclature of the Arborescent Flora of the United States," Appendix, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, 1897.

« AnteriorContinuar »