My dear Hooker,
I have written to Lubbock a long screed stating my views [Referring to the relations between the South Kensington department and the City and Guilds Committee on Technical Education.] with unmistakable distinctness as politeful as may be, and asking him, if he thought well, to send them on to whomsoever it may concern. As old Gutzlaff used to say when he wanted to get evidence from a Chinee—"Gif him four dozen, someting vill transpire." At any rate the Chinee transpired, and I hope some official will.
Here beginneth more gentian craze.
I have not examined Moorcroft. yet, but if the figure in Roxb. is trustworthy it's a primary and no mistake. I can't understand your admitting Amarellae without coronae. The presence of a corona is part of the definition of the amarella group, and an amarella without a corona is a primary ipso facto.
Taking the facts as I have got them in the rough, and subject to minor verifications, the contrast between the Andean, Himalayan, and Caucasian Gentian Florae is very striking.
TABLE OF GENTIAN FLORAE.
Column 1: Place.
Column 2: Simplices.
Column 3: Ciliatae.
Column 4: Coronatae.
Column 5: Interlobatae.
Andes : 27 : 0 (?) : 15 : 2.
Himalayas 1 (Moorecroft.) : 0 : 4 : 32.
Caucasus Pyrenees (all one) : 2 (lutea, umbellata) : 2 : 5 : 21.