1906 
The epoch-making researches of de Bary, Schwendener, Bor- 
net and others have conclusively demonstrated the dual nature of | 
the lichen structure ; that is, it consists of a colorless hyphal por- 
tion homologous with certain filamentous fungi; and a green 
celled portion homologous with certain low forms of algae. The 
specific algal homologues have been pretty accurately studied out. 
Concerning the specific homologues of the fungal portion our 
knowledge is less accurate. But in regard to both symbionts 
we are certain of their originally independent ancestral 
forms. This theory of Bornet and Schwendener has from the 
_ very first met with strong opposition from nearly all lichenologists 
(taxonomists, so called). Even a considerable number of phys- 
iologists and morphologists misconstrued evident facts with un- 
scientific perversity, notably Itzigsohn, Famintzin and Baranetzky. 
Even to this very day there are a number of lichenographers who 
persist in ignoring or directly opposing Schwendener’s theory. 
This is simply additional evidence of the correctness of the state- 
ment “ None are so blind as those who do not wish to see.” 
It would be useless to repeat the arguments based upon actual 
experimentation which conclusively prove the correctness of 
Schwendener’s theory. There is, however, a question which 
Schwendener and his immediate followers have almost unani- 
mously answered wrongly and that is the question of the true 
position of lichens in the vegetable kingdom. During the ante- 
Schwendenerian time, beginning with the earliest periods, most 
lichenologists looked upon lichens as autonomous structures, 
though this conclusion had no scientific basis founded on mor- 
phology and physiology. Their characteristic distribution and 
marked macroscopic appearance were thought sufficient to make 
'them a distinct group. Schwendener assumed that lichens re- 
sembled certain groups of fungi, both in structure and in their 
manner of growth, and should therefore be classed under fungi as 
ascolichenes and basidiolichenes. It is much to be regretted 
that Schwendener did not see his mistake in time to avoid con- 
fusion and unnecessary and unwarranted opposition to his theory. 
I will frankly admit that I formerly thought it most expedient to 
classify lichens as modified fungi. - But having since made a 
special study of lichen morphology, I now consider such a pro- 
