63 



be heated artificially, so as to ensure for their roots the tem- 

 perature to which they are naturally exposed, and which cannot 

 be estimated at less than 80° during the season of growth. 



Having thus adverted to Victoria, I trust I may be per- 

 mitted to avail myself of this opportunity, for maliing a remark 

 or two upon certain statements concerning it which have ap- 

 peared in the Annates des Sciences Naturelles for January of 

 the present year. The authors of these statements are Messrs. 

 Guillemin and D'Orbigny, and their object in putting them 

 forth is evidently that of shewing that if I first published it 

 I did not know how to describe it, and of claiming for the 

 latter traveller the credit of having first discovered it. 



M. Guillemin states that M. D'Orbigny, in the year 

 1828, sent dried specimens of the flowers and fruit to the 

 Museum at Paris, and that " cette plante avait de si grands 

 rapports avec VEuryale que les botanistes du Jardin de Paris 

 n'hesiterent pas a la considerer comme sa congenere ;'' the 

 remainder of M. Guillemin's memoir seems intended to shew 

 that in fact, although not an Euryale, Victoria is more 

 nearly allied to that genus than to NymphcEa, and he blames 

 me for not being of the same opinion. " Au lieu," says M. 

 Guillemin, "d'indiquer legerement les rapports du Victoria 

 avec VEuryalcy et d'insister sur ses differences avec le 

 Nymphcea, M. Lindley aurait du nous dire en quoi il differe 

 essentiellement de V Bury ale.'' This is rather an amusing 

 complaint from a gentleman who after all admits that Victo- 

 ria is not an Euryale, which he tells us that the botanists of 

 the French Museum always supposed it to be, till they were 

 set rifrht ; and it is the more curious since 1 liave in fact dis- 

 tinctly stated that which M. Guillemin complains of my having 

 omitted to state ; as he will see if he will refer to the Botanical 

 Register for 1838, where, at p. 12 and 13 of the miscellaneous 

 matter, the whole question is considered systematically, and a 

 much more detailed account of the organization of the flower 

 is given than what M. Guillemin has favoured us with. The 

 only additional remark that I find it necessary to make upon 

 M. Guillemin is this ; he attaches great value to a rostrate 

 process that rises up from the centre of the apex of the fruit 

 in Victoria, and he regards it as the most important mark of 

 distinction between that genus and Euryale. This may be ; 

 but if so, it furnishes an argument which he has overlooked, 

 against the afiinity of Victoria wdth that genus, and in 



