Page:Journal of botany, British and foreign, Volume 34 (1896).djvu/79

 ON THE BOTANICAL SUBDIVISION OF IRELAND. 59 publication of Gyhele Hibeniica marked the commencement of a large amount of field-work, this was in most cases confined to small areas, and Babington's county list lay unused, and apparently almost forgotten, till 1884, when Prof. W. E. M'Nab read before the Koyal Dublin Society a "Short Note on the Botanical Topo- graphical Divisions of Ireland," which is printed in their Fro- ceedi7igsr' This paper purports to be a revision and extension of Babington's scheme, but the suggestions put forward — the Eoman numerals for the provinces, the use of the word "province" instead of "district" (which was used in Cybele Hibemica), the giving of names to the provinces, and the numbering of the vice-counties — all these had been already published in Babington's paper ; and M'Nab's table of provinces and counties is identical with that of Babington, except that he commenced the numbering of provinces and of counties with I., and that he does not subdivide the county of Kerry. No further reference to or use of Babington's county-division scheme appears until the present year, when Messrs. Groves em- ployed it in their valuable paper on "The Distribution of the CharacecB in Ireland,"! in which the distribution of the species and varieties is shown in list form, on the plan of Watson's Topographical Botany. For some time past a sense of the importance of commencing the large amount of field-work that must be carried out before an Irish Topographical Bota7iy becomes a possibility has been steadily growing in my mind ; and this led me some months ago to go care- fully into the question of the most advantageous subdivision of the country into counties and vice-counties. As regards about twenty- four out of the thirty-two Irish counties, I had the benefit of at least some personal knowledge, topographical and botanical ; and regarding others, I have had the great advantage of the opinions of botanists whose special acquaintance with the flora of these counties is well known. The first result of my enquiry has been the con- viction that the subdivision of the larger counties as proposed by Babington can be now improved upon ; and indeed this is not a matter for surprise when we consider the enormous advance made during the intervening period of thirty-seven years in our knowledge of Irish botanical topography (though that knowledge is yet very far from complete). I am also convinced that the order in which the counties and vice-counties are numbered in Babington's scheme is not the most convenient or useful one that can be devised ; and in this view I am glad to have the support of several of the most practical Irish botanists. It is manifestly important that some scheme of county- division and county-numbering should be fixed once for all, according to which future records may be systematically noted. This is especially desirable at the present time, when there appears to be a distinct increase of activity as regards Irish botany, as shown not only by the work which is being done by home workers, t Irish Naturalist, Jan. and Feb. 1895*
 * Sci. Proc. R. D. S., n.s. iv. 197 (1885).