IN THE article The Lemon in China and Elsewhere the late Dr. Laufer started with two assumptions: that the is among the fruits we owe to India ; and that the word type 'lemon' is of Indic origin. Both of these assumptions are contrary to the generally expressed theories of botanists and philologists; and Dr. Laufer gave no evidence in favor of them. The one botanist, Sir George Watt, whom he quotes to support his views, is misquoted (see below); his statements are the opposite of those attributed to him by Dr. Laufer. The reason, perhaps, for this misquotation is that throughout his article Dr. Laufer apparently uses the word for Citrus medical, var. acida (Watt), which is the sour or common lime of India. That is, he transfers the Sanskrit and vernacular names of the lime to the lemon. Early travelers to India and popular writers used lemon indiscriminately for various kinds of citrus fruits, and current Anglo-Indian speech often uses for the lime. During a residence of six years in India, I did not see a lemon, though I, in common with other English-speaking persons, bought limes and limeade under the name of lemons and lemonade.2 But presumably when Dr. Laufer says he means the lemon. Indeed, he refers to the scientific name, Citrus limonia, Osbeck, adopted by Dr. Swingle for the lemon. Whether or not the and lime should be distinguished as separate species, as modern botanists do, it is a certainty that the Sanskrit and vernacular names and information about Watt's lime can not be transferred to Citrus limonia, Osbeck. Without attempt-