Denver mint

Joseph E. Laferriere joseph at IRIS.CEAMISH.UAEM.MX
Wed Jul 2 09:00:41 CDT 1997

Open letter to Tom Lammers (cc Taxacom and a couple friends)

Dear Tom,
   Thank you very much for your kind comments last week (pers comm)
concerning my humerous note on the Denver mint (Epluribus unum). This was
published not only in Plant Sciences Bulletin, but reprinted a few months
later in Aquilegia (newsletter of the Colorado Native Plant Society) and
posted to Taxacom a year or two ago. (to other taxacommers: the note was a
parody of a scientific description of a new plant, containing many jokes,
most of which dealt with US history).
   Would you consider the name Epluribus unum as now being validly
published? The description is of course in a language commonly known as
Pig Latin. The ICBN says that a description must be in Latin, but it does
not specify whether it must be in Human Latin or Pig Latin. The
description was indeed accompanied by a type, (I.M.A. Richman 1040,
deposited at the IRS herbarium). There is no IRS herbarium in Index
Kewensis;  believe me, I made it a point to check before publishing the
   So, what do you think?   I mean, besides thinking I am crazy.

Sincerely (or maybe not),


More information about the Taxacom mailing list