Sm MONOECIA. 



culty in determining any genus, which would be by 

 no means the case if we had them confounded with 

 the mass of the system. Even the species of the 

 same genus, as well as individuals of each species, 

 differ among themselves. How unwise and unscier- 

 tific then is it, to take as a primary mark of discrim- 

 ination, what nature has evidently made of less conse- 

 quence here than in any other case ! It is somewhat 

 like attempting a natural system, and founding its 

 primary divisions on the artificial circumstance of 

 number of stamens. 



I proceed to give some illustrations of the Orders 

 in Monoecia. 



1. Monandi'ia. Zanjiichellia^ Mill. Illustr. t. 77, and 

 Aegopricon, Plant, Ic. ex Herb. Linn. t. 42, are gen- 

 uine examples of this Class and Order, having a dif- 

 ferent structure in the accessory parts of their barren 

 and fertile flowers. Artocarpus, the celebrated Bread- 

 fruit, may likewise be esteemed so on account of a 

 partial calyx in the barren flower. The other amen- 

 taceous genera may most intelligibly perhaps be re- 

 ferred to the Order, Polyandria. Chara is now re- 

 moved to the first Class in the system ; see Eng. Bot. 

 t. o^&, 



2. Diamlria. Anguria can remain here only till the pro- 

 posed reformation takes place, having no difference of 

 structure in its flowers. Lemna, so imperfectly known 

 when Linmeus wrote, is now well understood, and, 

 having frequently united flowers, belongs to the sec- 

 ond Class ; see Engl Bot. t. 926, 1095, 1233. 



