*1 (26 ? Dec. 1899) The Camp,
Sunningdale.
My dear Strachey*2
I have digested the letters herewith returned. They suggest two chief points for consideration, and sundry minor;--
The chief are, 1) whether the list should be printed without the species of your own collecting being indicated by their numbers and then "Hall marked" by a comparison of the specimens with the types of Fl. B. Ind.;
2) whether the list is sufficiently brought up to date. [several words crossed out, illeg.] 1. I agree with Clarke and Dyer that your own collections should be indicated by their original numbers, and that their nomenclature should be authentic. The omission of your own numbers takes away all my interest in the work; it [1 word crossed out, illeg.] emasculates it. My great wish has always been to see your list published as being the first serious attempt ever made to collect and determine the elements of the Floras of a section of the Himalayas at all elevations from the plains to Tibet. In this you succeeded, now just half a century ago. Were no other list ever to appear, that, with its appended observations, would still give the only satisfactory view of the vegetation of the Himalayas as obtainable from one section. From it might be drawn for the first time an adequate sketch of the vegetation of the three Himalayan regions, their relations to

one another and to the Floras of Europe, of the Western Section and Northern area and of S. India and Malaya; of the proportions of the great groups of Phaenogams (as Monocots to Dicots). in each [1 word crossed out, illeg.] region; and it formed a basis for comparison with the Floras of other sections of the Himalayas.
It is hence of great historic value. You have merged it in a more extended list. I should not object to that were your collection properly indicated therein. The only admissible substitute for the numbers would be a column with "St. & (and) W." opposite every species gathered by yourselves..
As to Hall--marking, your Nomenclature, that I take it has been done, if (as I suppose you have) you have adopted (for the species, the names) the nomenclature of Fl. B. Ind. for the names, during the compilation of which all your collection came under review.
There may be some names to reconsider and some genera to revise with recent monographs, to which latter I shall adhere allude hereafter, -- but this cannot involve serious labor.
I agree with Clarke in the necessity of indicating in the new list alterations of named adopted in the old. These cannot be very numerous, and could be relegated to foot notes, or to an appendix of altered names.
2) As to the list being brought up to date -- that depends on how far Duthie has kept up to date in what you have added from him. There are monographs of genera subsequent to

Fl. B. Ind. that I hope Duthie has not overlooked, -- as Prain's monograph of Indian Pedicularis and Corydalis. Of Pedicularis he has 17 Kumaon specimens. His Kumaon is Sutlej to Karnal (?), and may include species not in your Kumaon; but 14 certainly are -- of which 4 have names altered from Fl. B. I. Of Corydalis he has 50 different Indian species against 24 in Fl. B. I.! I have not exhausted the Kumaon.
I do not agree with Clarke that you should wait for, or be deterred from printing by any forthcoming work of Duthie's. I agree with you that your list will be of great value to Kumaon collectors, and, despite its imperfections, to Botanists.
One more point: I protest emphatically against your proposal of confining the issue to 150 copies, distributing a few and sending the rest to Dehra. Such privately issued works are nightmares, sneaks, intolerable nuisances. Their importance gets exaggerated, and they are vainly sought for or and are cited by those who have them, though inaccessible to others. Print 500 and put them on sale by commission. the sale will more than cover the expense of the 300 extra copies.
In the matter of what I think should be done before printing the list, if you approve, I do hope you will let me undertake it. I have just completed Trimen's Hand book of the Crypt. Floras, and except Bot. Mag. and a revise of Indian Impatiens have no Bot. work on hand. I could not do much till some warmth and light returns, but would be getting up my subject.