|fteK95
.G715

Gray, Asa

A natural system of Botany

Cdmbusiion of Fhosphorus, tyc. . 291

communicating with the bag of oxygen is opened, in intense com-
bustion ensues; since the oxygen, emitted in a jet from the capillary
orifices of the tube, reaching the melted phosphorus exerts it into
an active combustion, which the nitrous oxide afterwards sustains
with great energy1. ' /

Combustion of Phosphorus in Nitrous Oxitlc illustrated.

292 Dr. Lindley's Natural System of Botany.

Art. VIII. — A Natural System of Botany ; or a systematic view
of the Organization, Natural Affinities, and Geographical Dis-
tribution of the ivhole Vegetable Kingdom; together with the uses
of the most important species in Medicine, the Arts, and rural or
domestic economy; by John Lindley, Ph. D. &c. Second edi-
tion, ivith numerous additions and corrections, and a complete list
of genera, ivith their synonyms. London: Longman, Rees, &c.
1836. pp. 526. 8vo.

(Communicated for this Journal.)

The cultivators of Botany in this country are generally acquainted
with the former edition of this work through the American reprint,
edited by Dr. Torrey, and published by the Messrs. Carvill of New
York, in the spring of 1831. Dr. Lindley's treatise was at the time
of its appearance, the only introduction to the Natural System in
the English language, if we except a translation of Achille Rich-
ard's Nouveaux Elemens de la Botanique, which was published
about the same period. It is unnecessary to state that a treatise
of this kind was greatly needed, or to allude either to the pecu-
liar qualifications of the learned and industrious author for the ac-
complishment of the task, or the high estimation in which the work
is held in Europe. But we may very properly offer our testimony
respecting the great and highly favorable influence which it has
exerted upon the progress of botanical science in the United States.
Great as the merits of the work undoubtedly are, we must neverthe-
less be excused from adopting the terms of extravagant and some-
what equivocal eulogy employed by a popular author, who gravely
informs his readers that no book, since printed bibles were first sold
in Paris by Dr. Faustus, ever excited so much surprise and wonder
as did Dr. Torrey's edition of Lindley's Introduction to the Natural
System of Botany. Now we can hardly believe that either the
author or American editor, of the work referred to, were ever in
danger, as was honest Dr. Faustus, of being burned for witchcraft ;
neither do we find any thing in its pages calculated to produce such
astonishing effects, except, perhaps, upon the minds of those botan-
ists, if such they may be called, who had never dreamed of any im-
portant changes in the science since the appearance of the good Dr.
Turton's translation of the Species Plantarum, and who speak of

Dr. Lindley's Natural System of Botany. 293

Jussieu as a writer who " lias greatly improved upon the natural
orders of Linnaeus."* We have no hesitation, however, in express-
ing our conviction that no single work has had such a general and
favorable influence upon the advancement of botanical science in
this country, as the American edition of Dr. Lindley's Introduction
to the Natural System. This treatise, however useful, was indeed
not absolutely indispensable to the favored few, who, aided by the
works of Jussieu, Brown, De Candolle, the elder and younger Rich-
ard, &c. were already successfully and honorably pursuing their in-
vestigations ; but to the numerous cultivators of botany throughout
the country, who could seldom be expected to possess, or have ac-
cess to, well furnished libraries, and to whom the writings of these
great luminaries of the science were mostly unknown except by
name, this publication was a truly welcome acquisition, conferring
advantages which those alone who have pursued their studies under
such unfavorable circumstances can fully appreciate.

A second and greatly improved edition of this work having ap-
peared within the past year, it occurred to the writer of these re-
marks, that a cursory notice of it might not be unacceptable to the
readers of the American Journal of Science. We do not intend, in
these observations, to engage in a defense of what is called the Nat-
ural System of Botany ; but take it for granted, that the science can
by no other method be successfully and philosophically pursued : or,

* Dr. Lindley is quite right in his remark that the chief difficulties the student
has to encounter in the study of botany, upon the principles of the Natural System,
have been very much exaggerated by persons who have written upon the subject
without understanding it. To refer to a single instance. In the fifth edition of
the Manual of Botany, by Mr. Eaton, an account of the Natural Orders of Jussieu
is given, in which the genera Ambrosia and Xanthium are referred to Urticeae ;
and in a note it is added, " Some botanists place the last two genera in the order Co-
rymbifcrcc, also in the Linnccan class Syngcncsia. I see no good reason for these in-
novations." Now Linnreus, in his artificial arrangement, certainly did place these
genera (and also Parthcnium and Iva,) in Moncecia Pentandria; but the inno-
vator in this instance, is Jussieu himself, who never referred these two genera to
Urticeae, but places them in his order Corymbifcrcc, (Compositae,) where they truly
belong. The descriptions of Natural Orders in Eaton's Manual, purporting to be
taken from Jussieu, bear a very remote resemblance indeed to the ordinal char-
acters of the admirable Genera Plantarum of that author, while the occasional
criticisms on its supposed errors afford the clearest proof that the work was not
understood by the author alluded to. It should be recollected that, previously to
the reprint of Dr. Lindley's Introduction, Mr. Eaton's Manual was the only work
professing to give a view of the Natural System, within the reach of the great ma-
jority of the botanical students of this country, excepting, perhaps, the American
edition of Smith's Grammar of Botany.

294 Dr. Lindky's Natural System of Botany.

to employ the forcible language of Linnasus, " Methodus naturalis

'primus ct ultimas finis botanices est et erit," " Primum et ulti-

mum in hoc botanicis desideratum est." The few persons who re-
main at this day unconvinced of its advantages are not likely to be
affected by any arguments that we could adduce. A somewhat
larger number may perhaps be found in this country who admit the
importance and the utility. of a natural arrangement in the abstract;
but decline to avail themselves of the advantages it affords in the
study of plants, because, forsooth, it is too much trouble to acquire
the enlarged views of vegetable structure which are necessary for
the application of its principles. It would almost seem, from the
views and practice of such botanists, that they considered it the chief
object of a classification to afford the means of ascertaining the name
of an unknown plant by the slightest examination of its structure,
and with the least possible expenditure of thought.

In the first edition, Dr. Lindley entered into some detailed expla-
nations to show the fallacy of the common opinion that the artificial
system of Linnasus is easy, and the Natural System difficult of ap-
plication. The sentiments of the public having undergone so great
a change upon this subject within the last five or six years, that he
finds it no longer necessary to adduce these considerations, and ac-
cordingly commences at once with a developement of the principles
on which the Natural System is founded, viz. "That the affinities of
plants may be determined by a consideration of all the points of re-
semblance between their various parts, properties, and qualities ; that
thence an arrangement may be deduced in which those species will
be placed next each other which have the greatest degree of rela-
tionship ; and that consequently the quality or structure of an im-
perfectly known plant may be determined by those of another which
is well known. Hence arises its superiority over arbitrary or arti-
ficial systems, such as that of Linnasus, in which there is no com-
bination of ideas, but which are mere collections of isolated facts,
not having any distinct relation to each other." — (Preface, p. vii.)

We have never met with a more clear and succinct account of the
principles on which the primary divisions of the vegetable kingdom
rest, than that comprised in the following extract. Those acquainted
with the first edition will perceive that the author has changed his
opinions respecting the number of these primary divisions, or classes ;
the Gymnosperma, or Flowering plants with naked ovules (compri-
sing the Coniferae, Cycadere, and, according to Brongniart and Lind-

Dr. Lindlci/s Natural System of Botany. 295

ley, the Equisetacerc,) and the Rhizantlia, as originally established
by Blume, being here admitted to the rank of independent classes.
Their claim to this rank, however, can as yet be hardly considered
as fully established.

" One of the first things that strikes an enquirer into the structure
of plants, is the singular fact, that while all species are capable of
propagating their race, the mode in which this important function is
accomplished is essentially different in different cases. The great
mass of plants produce flowers which are succeeded by fruits, con-
taining seed, which is shed or scattered abroad, and grows into new
individuals. But in Ferns, Mosses, Mushrooms, and the like, nei-
ther flowers, nor seeds properly so called, can be detected ; but pro-
pagation is effected by the dispersion of grains or spores which are
usually generated in the substance of the plant, and seem to have
little analogy with true seeds. Hence the vegetable world separates
into two distinct groups, the Flowering and the Flowerless. Upon
examining more closely into the respective peculiarities of these
two groups, it is found that flowering plants have sexes, while flow-
erless plants have none; hence the former are called Sexual, and the
latter Asexual. Then again the former usually possess a highly de-
veloped system of spiral or other vessels, while the latter are either
altogether destitute of them, or have them only in the highest orders,
and then in a peculiar state : for this reason flowering plants are also
called Vascular, and flowerless Cellular. More than this, all flower-
ing plants, when they form stems, increase by an extension of their
ends and a distention or enlargement of their sides ; but flowerless
plants appear to form their stems simply by the addition of new
matter to their points ; for this reason while the former are princi-
pally Exogens or Endogens, the latter are called Acrogens. Flow-
ering plants are also for the most part furnished with respiratory or-
gans or stomates, while flowerless plants are to a great extent desti-
tute of them. No one then can doubt that in the vegetable king-
dom, two most essentially distinct divisions exist, the Flowering and
the Floiverless, and that these differ not in one circumstance only,
but are most essentially unlike in many points both of organization
and physiology.

" In like manner, Flowering plants are themselves divisible into
equally well marked groups. Some of them grow by the addition
of new woody matter to the outside of their stem beneath the bark ;
these are Exogens : others grow by the addition of new woody mat-

296 Dr. Lindley's Natural System of Botany.

ter to the inside of their stem near the centre ; those are Endogens.
But Exogens have two or more cotyledons to their embryo, and
hence are called Dicotyledons ; while Endogens have only one co-
tyledon, and are, therefore, Monocotyledons. Exogens have the
young external wood connected with the centre by medullary pro-
cesses ; Endogens having no occasion for such a provision, are des-
titute of it. In Exogens the leaves have their veins disposed in a
netted manner ; in Endogens the veins run parallel with each other.
The number of parts in the flower of an Exogen is usually five, or
its multiples ; in an Endogen it is as usually three, or its multiples.
In germination the young root of Exogens is a mere extension of the
radicle ; but of Endogens it is protruded from within the radicle ;
hence the former have been named Exorhizcc, and the latter Endor-
hizfc. In this case then, as in the last, we have two groups differing
entirely from each other in their germination, the structure of their
stem and leaves, their mode of growth, the arrangement of the parts
of the flower, and in the organization of their embryo. It is impos-
sible, therefore, not to recognize such groups also as natural.

" To this separation of the vegetable kingdom into Exogens, En-
dogens, and Acrogens, or by whatever synonymous names these
groups may be known, many botanists confine themselves. But
there are two others, of subordinate importance perhaps, but never-
theless characterized by circumstances of a similar nature, and, there-
fore, I think, to be esteemed of equal dignity with them. In true
Exogens and Endogens, the fertilizing principle is communicated to
the young seeds through the medium of a stigma which terminates
a case or pericarp in which they are enclosed. But in some plants
otherwise Exogens, the fertilizing principle of the pollen is applied
immediately to the seeds, without the intervention of any pericarp-
ial apparatus, and they bear the same relation to other Exogens as
frogs and similar reptiles to other animals. These plants, therefore,
are separated as a distinct class, under the name of Gymnosperms.
Like the other groups of the same grade, these are also found to
possess peculiarities of a subordinate nature. For instance, they
have in many cases more cotyledons than two, whence they have
been called Poly cotyledons ; their radicle usually adheres to the al-
bumen in which the embryo lies, and that circumstance has given
rise to the name Synorhiza. The veins of their leaves, when they
have any veins, are either simple or forked ; in which respect they
approach Endogens on the one hand, and Acrogens on the other.

Dr. Lindlcy's Natural System of Botany. 297

And finally, their vascular system is very imperfect compared with
that of other Exogens of an equal degree of development.

The other group, called Rhizanthce, is far less correctly known,
but it seems to stand as it were between Endogens and Acrogens
of the lowest grade ; agreeing with the latter in the absence or very
imperfect state of the vascular system, in a general resemblance to
Fungi, and in the apparent seeds being mere masses of sporules ;
but apparently according with Endogens in the ternary number of
their floral envelopes, and in the presence of fully developed sexes.

" Certainly there is no possibility of obtaining such important pri-
mary groups as these by any kind of artificial contrivance." — (Pre-
face, p. x. — xii.)

The grand natural divisions of the vegetable kingdom are, there-
fore perfectly obvious, and may be very clearly defined. With our
present knowledge of vegetable structure no great difficulty is expe-
rienced in characterizing the orders or natural families, and all sub-
ordinate groups. The great desideratum has ever been to effect
such an arrangement of the orders under the primary classes, that
each family should be placed next to those which it most nearly re-
sembles. This might easily be accomplished, if the idea once so
strongly insisted upon by poets and metaphysicians, of a chain of
beings, a regular gradation, by a single series, from the most perfect
and complicated to the most simple forms of existence, had any
foundation in truth. On the contrary, nothing is more evident,
than that almost every order, or other group, is allied not merely to
one or two, but often to several others, which are sometimes widely
separate from each other; and, indeed, these several points of re-
semblance or affinity, are occasionally of about equal importance.
A truly natural lineal arrangement is therefore impracticable, since
by it only one or two out of several points of agreement can be indi-
cated. As this method is, however, the only one that can be fol-
lowed in books, all that can be done is to arrange the orders in such
a manner as to offer the least possible interruption to their natural
affinities. The number of orders is so large that practical conveni-
ence seems to require their arrangement into groups subordinate to
the primary classes ; and when manifestly natural assemblages can-
not be recognized, we are obliged to employ those which, being less
strongly marked, and distinguished by a smaller number of charac-
ters, are apparently of a more artificial nature. The arrangement
employed by the learned Jussieu, in his celebrated Genera Planta-

Vol. XXXII.— No. 2. 3S

298 Dr. Lindleifs Natural System of Botany.

rum, although to a considerable extent artificial, has been almost
universally adopted, until within the last few years.

In this method Dicotyledonous plants are primarily divided into
three groups ; the first including those with a polypetalous corolla ;
the second, those with a monopetalous corolla ; and the third, those
destitute of a corolla. These sections are subdivided, (as also the
monocotyledons) by means of characters taken from the insertion of
the stamens (or corolla,) whether hypogynous, perigynous, or epigy-
nous. The arrangement here pursued, which is too well known to
require further notice, is substantially adopted by De Candolle, the
difference being more in appearance than reality. Dr. Lindley
discarded these subdivisions in the first edition of his work ; but the
new distribution of the orders therein proposed possesses few advan-
tages, and, indeed appears not to have satisfied the author himself.
In the same year with the publication of the work just mentioned,
the Ordines Plantarum of Bartling appeared, in which a more nat-
ural arrangement of the orders is attempted by the formation of ag-
gregate or compound orders, as originally proposed, and in several
instances successfully accomplished, by Robert Brown. An analo-
gous plan was pursued by Agardh in his Aphorismi Botanici, (1817,)
and again in his Classes Plantarum, (1825;) but these attempts,
however ingenious, do not seem to have obviated, in any considera-
ble degree, the inconveniences of a lineal arrangement.

We now return to our author, whose views upon this subject have
been materially modified since the original publication of his Intro-
duction to the Natural System. The method now employed was
first sketched in the Nixus Plantarum, (1832,) and afterwards in
the Key to Structural, Physiological, and Systematic Botany,*
(1835,) and is more fully developed and illustrated in the work
before us. He now admits, as we have already seen, five primary
classes, two of which, however, are much smaller than the others
and of subordinate importance, and may be considered as transition
classes, viz. Gymnospermce, which connect Exogens with the higher
Acrogens, and Rhizantha, which form the transition from Endogens
to Acrogens of the lowest grade. The great class Exogena (Di-
cotyledones of Jussieu,) is divided into three subclasses, viz.

* This excellent little work consists of an augmented edition of the author's
Outlines of the first principles of Botany, with a revised translation of the Nixus
Plantarum.

Dr. Lindley's Natural System of Botany. 299

1. Polypetalcc; those with the floral envelopes consisting of both
calyx and corolla, the latter composed of distinct petals.

2. Monopetala, ; those with the petals combined in a monopeta-
lous corolla.

3. Incompletes; those always destitute of a corolla, the calyx
also often incomplete or absent.

Thus far this mode of subdivision is nearly the same with that of
Jussieu ; Dr. Lindley, however, neglecting altogether the characters
afforded by the insertion of the stamens, divides the polypetalous
orders into seven, and the monopetalce and incomplete each into five
sections, or groups. As a specimen of this plan, we copy the names
of the groups of the first subclass, with their synoptical characters.

1. Albuminosce. Embryo very considerably shorter and smaller
than the albumen.

2. Epigynosce. Ovary inferior, usually having an epigynous disk.

3. Parietosce. Placentation parietal.

4. Calycosa. Calyx incompletely whorled ; two of the sepals
being exterior.

5. Syncarposee. None of the characters of the other groups, and
with the carpels compactly united.

6. Gynobaseosa. Carpels not exceeding five, diverging at the
base, arranged in a single row around an elevated axis or gynobase.
Stamens usualy separate from the calyx.

7. Apocarposa. None of the characters of the other groups, but
with the carpels distinct, or separable by their faces, or solitary.

Next, every group is divided into smaller groups, each of which
includes one, two, or several orders. These minor groups are called
Alliances, and are distinguished by the termination ales. Thus,
under the Albuminose group, we have

Alliance 1. Ranales, comprising the Ranunculaceae, Papavera-
ceae, (with its suborder, as Lindley, following Bernhardi, considers it,
Fumarieas,) Nymphaeaceae, (to which Hydropeltideas is improperly
joined,) and Nelumbiacea? ;

Alliance 2. Anonales, which comprehends the Nutmeg tribe, the
Anonaceae, Magnoliaceae, he. ;

Alliance 3. Umbellales, including the Umbelliferous tribe, with
the nearly allied Araliaceae ;

Alliance 4. Grossales, consisting chiefly of the Grossulaceae or
Currant tribe ; and lastly

300 Dr. Lindley's Natural System of Botany.

Alliance 5. Pittosporales, which strikes us as a singularly hetero-
geneous assemblage, bringing together into one group the Vitaceae,
Pittosporaceae, Olacaceae, Francoaceae, and Sarraceniaceae !

All the subclasses and groups, both of Exogens and Endogens,
are subdivided in a similar manner ; but we cannot here proceed
further with our enumeration. It will be borne in mind that the
chief object of an arrangement of this kind, is to facilitate the study
of the natural orders, by dividing the extensive primary classes into
sections of convenient size, and to dispose these groups, and the
orders they comprise, as nearly in accordance with their respective
affinities and relationships as a lineal arrangement will allow. It is
impossible, in the present state of our knowledge, to say how far the
views of our author will ultimately be approved. Every attempt of
the kind must necessarily be very imperfect, so long as the structure
of only a limited portion of the whole vegetable kingdom has been
attentively and completely examined ; and the author is well aware
"that this part of the work will require many great changes and im-
provements before it can be considered at all established." Notwith-
standing the objections to which it is liable in many particulars, we
agree with the author in the opinion, " that even in its present state
it will be found to be attended with numerous advantages, and that
every step which may be taken in determining the limits of natural
groups subordinate to the primary classes, must be a decided gain to
the science. So rapid is the advance of our knowledge of the ve-
getable kingdom, and so numerous are the new types of structure
that present themselves to the systematic botanist, that it is to be
feared lest another chaos should be brought on by the masses of im-
perfectly grouped species with which the science will soon abound."

The names of natural orders, as first established, do not appear to
have been framed in accordance with any uniform rule, as to deri-
vation or mode of termination. They were sometimes intended to
express some characteristic feature, (Ex. Lcguminosa ', Labiatce,
Crucifera, Umbellifene, Conifera, he.) but more commonly some
genus was selected as the type of the family, which was designated
either by the plural of the genus simply, (as Myrti, Lilia, Irides,
Euphorbia,) or with a slight prolongation, (as Orchidea, Jasminea,
he.) or with the termination still further modified, (as in Cyperoidea,
Aroidece, Boraginece, or Ranunculacece, Rosacea, Cucurbit acece,
he.) The derivation of the name of an order from some prominent
genus is now the universal practice ; and for the sake of uniformity,

Dr. Lindley's Natural System of Botany. 301

as well as to distinguish such names from those of genera in the plu-
ral number, the termination acetc is given to orders, and that of ea.
to suborders, &ic. The advantages of uniformity in this respect are
manifest, and Dr. Lindley therefore insists upon the adoption of the
rule in all cases. In the Key to Botany, published the year previ-
ous to the appearance of the second edition of the present work, the
termination in acect is employed, not only in names of orders formed
from those of genera, but also in the few still in use which relate to
some peculiarity in the habit of the family. Thus, instead of Cru-
cifera3, Umbellifera, Conifera, &c. we have Cruciacece, Umhella-
cea, and Conacca;. These are, however, very properly abandoned
in the work before us, in which the author inclines to give up the
old and familiar names of these orders, and to substitute those formed
in the customary manner from well known genera. Brassicacea,
Apiacecc and Pinacece may certainly be as good names as any other
when we once get accustomed to them, but it seems hardly neces-
sary to make any change in the case of names of this kind. Dr.
Lindley, as we have already seen, gives to the names of Alliances
the termination ales, and to the groups that of osa. The chief ad-
vantage of this system is, that the name of any group at once indi-
cates its rank and importance.

The value of this work is greatly increased by the complete list
of genera, (so far as known at the time of its publication,) with the
principal synonyms, appended to each order and properly arranged
under their several sub-orders, sections, he. This laborious and
difficult task is upon the whole very faithfully executed. We ob-
serve, however, several errors, typographical and otherwise, which
are not noticed in the appendix, and in a few instances the same
<:enus is referred to two different orders. The whole catalogue will
doubtless be rendered more perfectly accurate in a future edition.

The whole number of genera comprised in this enumeration, ex-
clusive of synonyms, is 7840. Sprengel's Systcma Vegetabilium,
which was finished in 1827, contains (exclusive of the appendix)
only 3593 genera, or not quite half the number now known ; while
the 12th edition of Systema Naturce (the last of Linnaeus himself)
comprises 1228 genera, or only about a third more than are now
known in a single family.

This great and rapid increase is perhaps chiefly owing to the dis-
covery of new plants ; but it is also attributable in a good degree to
the more accurate knowledge of those already known. In either

302 Vr. Lindhy's Natural System of Botany.

case, it is the natural result of the progress of discovery ; and in-
stead of embarrassing the student, as is often supposed, does in re-
ality render the study of the science much more clear and satisfac-
tory.* Notwithstanding the great increase of genera within the last
few years, it may be safely said that at no previous period could a
really useful knowledge of the vegetable kingdom be acquired with
so little labor. In hazarding this remark, it is of course taken for
granted that the student will avail himself of all the advantages of
modern physiological botany and of the natural system : for so rapid
has been the discovery of new and strange forms of structure, for
which the artificial arrangement of Linnaeus makes no provision, that
the student who takes that system as his guide has indeed a hopeless
task before him.

The essential characters of the orders appear to have been very
carefully revised in this edition, as also the remarks upon their affin-
ities, geographical distribution and sensible properties. Did our lim-
its allow, we might call the attention of our readers more particu-
larly to this part of the work. We cannot bring our remarks to a
close, however, without suggesting what we consider a very desira-
ble improvement upon the manner in which the seed is described
not only in this, but in almost all modern systematic works. It is
very necessary that an organ which affords such important charac-
ters, both as to its situation in the fruit, and particularly as to its in-
ternal structure, should be described with the greatest possible clear-
ness and precision, and in an uniform manner. The prevalent fault
of which we complain is thus noticed, as long ago as the year 1811,
by that most acute botanist, the late L. C. Richard.

* This remark rests upon the supposition that proposed genera are clearly dis-
tinguished from their allies by essential differences of structure, and are not such
genera as those often proposed by Mr. Rafinesque, or Mr. Spach. (Vid. Ann. Sci.
Naturcllcs, New Ser. vol. 4.) We cannot avoid here noticing a remark in Mr.
Eaton's Manual of Botany, (ed. 7, p. 84,) intended as a severe criticism upon
one of the most eminent botanists of the age. After giving, from De Candolle's
Prodromus, the character of the genus Encniion (in which " antheris'subrotundis"
is translated " with rough anthers") the author subjoins — " A doubtful genus; but
De Candolle requires very little authority for a new genus." Now the genus Ene-
mion was established by Rafinesque, upon what is now well known to be a species
of Isopyrum; and De Candolle, who never saw the plant of Rafinesque, but merely
copies his published description, prefixes the mark of a doubtful genus, and re-
marks that it seems to be the same as Isopyrum ! The critic who could hazard
such a remark must have presumed that the Prodromus of De Candolle was not
likely to fall into the hands cf his readers.

Dr. Lindley's Natural System of Botany. 303

" Caesalpinus, Adanson, Jussieu, and Gaertner, always take into
view the direction of the embryo relative to the pericarp merely.
This method appears to me improper ; first, because it does not in-
dicate with precision that direction which is most important to be
understood ; secondly, because the pericarpic direction of the em-
bryo is often difficult to be ascertained, and is sometimes variable or
even wholly different in the seeds of the same fruit. I have already
shown by numerous examples in my Analyse du fruit, that the best
method is to indicate the direction of the seed relative to the peri-
carp, and of the embryo relative to the seed."*

In very many descriptions, the direction of the embryo relative to
the seed can only be inferred from the pericarpic direction, or which
is still more objectionable, the same structure is described by very
different language in different instances, thus rendering unnecessarily
complicated an investigation which of itself is not usually difficult.
We may adduce as an example the five orders comprised in the
alliance Ranales, which stands at the commencement of Dr. Lind-
ley's treatise. We have no means of ascertaining, from the essential
character of any one of these orders, either the spermic direction and
position of the embryo, or the situation of the chalaza and micropyle
relative to the hilum, from which the former may be inferred. It is
commonly stated that the embryo is situated at the base of the albu-
men ; but it is not specified whether the radical is next the hilum,
(as in Papaveraceae, Nymphaeaceae, &ic.) or points in the opposite
direction, (as in Nelumbiaceaj and Cabombaceae ;) a matter of essen-
tial importance, since the seeds result in the one case from the ripen-
ing of anatropous, and in the other of orthotropous, ovules.

The students of botany in this country are greatly indebted to the
learned editor and the enterprising publishers of the first American
edition of this work. May we hope to have our obligations increas-
ed by the reprint of this greatly improved edition ? A. G.

* Ann. Du Museum, vol. 17, p. 446.

304

Electro-Meteorological Observations.

Art. IX. — Electro-Meteorological Observations ; by Jas. Svvaim.

® i 03

~ ~3

o"S o

C

o

a

3

o

;

v w -

3

o

u
u

o

CJ

1836.

a

1

I

£3 *J QJ

0>

a!
>

■o"!

State of Weather, &c.

o

a

o

a

s

QJ 1

s a t

U 9) -

SJ3 «

o

o
-J

£|

V

'3

c

B ? H

1

~

>>

s

is

o

3

•a

a

a.

a

£_

a

a

a-

o

-:

£

P*

p. M. h. in.

Oct. 23. |61.50

53.00

44.99 30.

s. w.

w. by n. Clear — clear.

« 24.-4 167.00

57.00

48. 76 ! 30. 25 276

308 s. e.— s. w.

w. by N.'Clear — clear.

" 25. [43.50

36.011

22.05 30.29

N.

Clear. Clear — clear.

" 26.— 3 30 45.00

36.50

21.02,30.20 55

00

W. — N. W.

w.

Clear — cloudy.

" 27. ;40.50

36.00

27.63 20.76

N. W.

w.

Cloudy— cloudy.

" 2S.-4 46.00

39.110

27.5230.05

44

52

S — N. W.

Clear.

Clear — Cloudy.

" 29. 51.50

42.50

20.69 29.93

N. W.

N. W.

Hazy — cloudy.

" 30.

425H

38.50

31.80 29.22

n. by e.

W.

Light clouds — cloudy.

" 31.

40.50

35.00

24.32 29.34

E.

Clear. Clear — cloudy.

Nov. 1.

48.00

43.00

36.03129.14

N. N. E.

Clear. [Clear— clear.

" 2.

29.69

N. N. E.

N. N. E. Cloudy — rain.

" 3. 45.50

40.50

32.79 29.84

N. W.

n. w. [Cloudy — clear.

" 4.— 2 30 44.00

37.50

26.15l30.20

127

158

W. — N. W.

n. w. {Cloudy — clear.

" 5.— 245 40.00

31.00

21.83 30.25

74

84

W. — N. W.

n. w. {Partially cloudy — cloudy.

" 6.

43.00

38.00

29.45' 30.04

W. S. W.

Clear. [Cloudy day.

" 7.

51.00

43.50

33.2530.09

s. w.

w. s. w. Cloudy day.

" 8.

51.50

46.00

39.19i30.14

N. W.

Clear. j Cloudy — hazy.

« g._3 40 53.00

47.75

41.68:30.65

58

68 N. E. — E. N. E.

w. by N.iClear — cloudy.

" " 3 50 52.25

1 S.I II

43. 13130.65

82

112 JN. E. — E. N. E.

w. by n.

'< " 4 7 53.50

49.a

44.04J30.65

151

200 N. E.— E. N. E.

w. by n.I

" 10.— 2 35 54.5(1

50.25

45.7930.57

476

700

E.

e. by s-iClear,cloudy, rain at night.

" 11. 65.00

6i.a

58.25130.07

s. by E.

s. by w. Cloudy — rain.

" ] 2.— 3 25 62.25

58. 51

55.65 30.05

136

201

W. — N. W.

s. w. [Clear day.

" 13.

50.00

44.00

35.96,30.0^

N. N. W.

w. by s. Clear day.

" 14.

29.80

E. N. E.

E. N. E. Rainy day.

" 15.

46.00

42.20

36.75t29.90

N. by W.

s. by w

Cloudy — clear.

" 16.

44. 5i:

40.00

32.92,29.88

N. W.

w.

Cloudy — clear — rain.

" 17.

42.51

38.01

30.31130. 19

N. W.

N. W.

Clear— flying clouds.

" 18.

43.51

38.51.

30.13 30.37

n. by w.

Clear.

Clear day.

" 19.

40.50

30.01

27.63 30.50

N. E.

w. s. w.j Clear day.

" 20.

51.51

48.50

45.13 30.21

N. E.

s. w. {Partially cloudy.

" 21.— 310 58.50

55.00

|51 95;29.95

415

564 n. w. — w.

w. s. w. Rain — llying clouds.

" 22.— 3 20 17.51

45.00

'41.78 30. 15

111

140, w.

Clear.

Clear — (lying clouds.

" 23.— 4 25 36.31

129.85

65

92 w.

w.

Clear — cloudy.

" 24.— 2 45 41.00

38.50 34.32 29.08

134 148 w.— w. bys.

w. by n. Clear — snow squalls.

The preceding experiments were made with common three stick
kites two feet six inches long and two feet four inches wide, tapering
from the middle to the top. Wire No. 30 was used, which was
wound on a reel four feet in circumference, having a glass axle run-
ning on a frame about three feet high, which was made in the same
manner as the one used by the Franklin Kite Club of Philadelphia.

An electrometer (5.) was connected with an iron ring (6.) through
which the wire passed, and which was suspended by means of silk,
in front of the reel for the purpose of preventing the wire from run-
ning off in winding up rapidly.

Also an instrument was used for finding the height of the kite,
which I constructed in the following manner. Two stationary arms

New York Botanical Garden Library

QK95.G715 gen

Gray, Asa/ A natural system of botany, or

3 5185 00092 1328