18 Mr. Brown’s Observations on the 
branches ; but in other cases, where they are equally distinct at 
the base of the tube, this supposition cannot be admitted. A 
monopetalous corolla not splitting at the base is necessarily con- 
nected with this structure, which seems also peculiarly weli 
adapted to the dense inflorescence of Composite; the vessels of 
the corolla and stamina being — and so disposed as to be 
least liable to suffer by pressure.” 
At the date of this publication I certainly had no knowledge of 
any similar observations having been previously made: but Inow - 
see in M. Cuvier's account of the proceedings of the Institute of 
France for 1815, that M. Cassini is considered as having antici- 
pated me on this subject, and as he says in * termes non équivo- 
ques." What these terms are, appears by a letter I have received 
from M, Cassini himself, in which he states his claim to rest on 
the following passage : | os B HOS 
* Chaque fleur hermaphrodite ou male contient cinq étamines, 
correspondant aux — nervures de la Sorone et par conséquent 
alternes avec ses lobes.” 
This passage occurs in a Memoir on the Stamina of Compositæ, 
which was read to the Institute of France in July 1813, and first 
appeared with the substance of that Memoir in the Journal de 
Physique, said to be for April 1814; but the actual date of the 
publication of which I have reason to believe was somewhat 
later, and very nearly corresponding with that at which M. de 
Jussieu was in possession of à copy of my essay containing 
the observations already quoted. I conclude it is not supposed 
I could have been acquainted with the passage in the original 
memoir, unless the report usually made on memoirs read to the 
Institute should have been printed, and should have actually no- — 
ticed this passage or the discovery itis now said to contain. - 
But independently of the near equality of dates, I cannot con- 
sider 
© sc 
