202 DR. M. T. MASTERS ON THE FOLIATION AND 
state of knowledge. If, for instance, Robert Brown had bethought 
himself of the true nature of the so-called stipules in this group, 
would he have written that “in this genus (Logania) the import- 
ance of stipulation seems to be entirely lost; for it contains spe- 
cies agreeing in this respect with Rubiacez, others in which the 
stipule are lateral and distinct, and one species at least in which 
they are entirely wanting" *P 
Brown there referred simply to the value of the character for 
classificatory purposes ; and as in this particular group it is incon- 
stant as to presence and variable in appearance when present, the 
remark was in that connexion justified. On the other hand, if it 
be true that these organs have distinct morphological significance, 
and if they furnish a clue to the affinity of the group, then it 
must be admitted that they are of such importance, that their 
occasional absence, however much it may detract from their value 
in an artificial scheme of classification, does not impair their 
intrinsie value as indications of affinity where they are present. 
Their presence, we may say, helps us to unravel their genealogy ; 
their absence helps us to forecast the future of their race. 
Under the term stipule, as is generally recognized now-a-days, 
bodies of very varied morphological significance are included. 
My present purpose is to point out the nature of the so-called 
stipule or auricle in Buddleia auriculata t, and from it to draw 
certain inferences as to the conformation of sundry of its allies. 
The plant (for fresh specimens of which I am indebted to 
Mr. Green, gardener to Sir George Macleay) is provided with 
two leafy, ear-shaped, reflexed appendages, one on each side of 
the stem between the bases of the petioles. The true leaves are 
at first in decussating pairs; but in the lateral shoots, at least, 
by torsion of the stem, they all come to be placed in one horizontal 
plane, and are disposed right and left of the axis which bears them, 
while the auricles just mentioned are antero-posterior, or supe- 
rior and inferior according to the direction in which the branch is 
held. lf these auricles were really appendages to, or excres- 
cences from, the leaf or from the leaf-stalk, there would be one 
on each side of the base of each petiole; that is to say, there 
would be two between each pair of petioles, or four in all. It is 
* R. Brown, ‘Botany of Terra Australis! p. 564, ed. Bennett, vol i. 
p. 97. 
t Buddleia auriculata, Benth. in Hook. Comp. Bot. Mag. ii. p. 60, et in DC. 
Prod. x. (1846) p. 445, “ Petiolis basi auriculis rotundatis amplexicaulibus ete.” 
