1877.J 



AND HOBTIGULTUBIST. 



181 



in the blue glass pen onlj' increased 124i lbs. Here 

 is a gain of 263 lbs. in a single animal in a common 

 sty over a single animal confined in a blue glass 

 Bty. The General explains this by saying that 

 the common sty pig was a strong fellow who 

 stole more food from his companions, than well- 

 behaved swine are expected to take " 



Now if we substitute Petunias and Morning 

 Glories for pigs, and cross fertilization for blue 

 glass, and turn to Mr. Darwin's recent work, the 

 two read very much alike. The cross-fertilized 

 grew a few inches more and weighed heavier 

 in the same time. But the critics just now are 

 asking General Pleasanton what fatness and 

 weight have to do with vital power. The fat man 

 and the fat pigs will get sick and die as easih' as 

 the lean one ; and the medium sized plant will 

 work its way through the world as well as the 

 over-grown one. 



The focts which our friends bring up are all 

 interesting enough, and whether they be Mr. 

 Darwin's on fertilization, or General Pleasan- 

 ton's on blue-glassed pigs, they are all worth a 

 good deal. It is only that we should be careful 

 how we apply the facts, for we are so liable to be 

 deceived by the imperfect use of language. — 

 Ed. G. M.l ' 



SCIENTIFIC THEORIES. 



BY N. F. F. 



It is with a great deal of satisfaction one notes 

 the growing disposition of our scientists to inves- 

 tigate things closely, and to trace out the why 

 they are thus and so, and in this pursuit go over 

 again and again the ground of theories, though 

 advanced by very distinguished men. 



"Nature al)hn]'s self-fertilization," as advanced 

 by some, is opi)(»sed to the experience of every 

 plant grower who takes delight in observation ; 

 but on the other side, to say that fertilizing 

 plants with their own pollen which do not natu- 

 rally fertilize themselves, is equal for re-i)roduction 

 to cross-fertilization, would be an error also. As to 

 " natural selection," is it not absolutely essen- 

 tial to the preservation of a species, that the 

 strongest should survive ? But can a higher order 

 of life result from natural selection ? Could it be 

 so, it would be subversive of order, the essence 

 of confusion. Does nature propagate and pre- 

 serve sports, bud variations, &c? Is there any 

 well established instance of a true vegetable hy- 

 brid? Is it not extremely doubtful whether a 



true hybrid exists in the whole vegetable world, 

 except as the result of man's interference? Apart 

 from the controlling power of man, how long 

 would any hybrid continue in existence? It 

 would of course be absurd to seek proof that the 

 great First Cause could not evolve man from 

 an atom, just as readily as create man as 

 we know h im . Admitting evolution to have been 

 the way in which man came into existencc.what 

 cause, good or otherAvise, can be served by mak- 

 ing the oftspring of the most exalted creature on 

 earth, so utterly helpless for so long a time after 

 birth, over and above that of every other 

 species of animal ; and this too, no matter 

 whether savage or civil, crude or refined, all of 

 the genus homo must pass this state of utter 

 helplessness. 



The writer has no wish to cavil at the result of 

 scientific research, but unless scientists can give 

 us — the great unlearned — something more solid 

 than they have yet done in this connection, they 

 must pardon us for adhering to the plain asser- 

 tion of Holy Writ," jnale and female created He 

 them." 



"Has science in her lofty pride, 

 Some better, holier truth supplied?" 



ON SELF-FERTILIZATION AND CROSS-FERTI- 

 LIZATION OF FLOWERS. 



BY THOMAS MEEHAN, GERMANTGWT^, PHII^. 



(Concluded from page 150 ) 



This brings us to the question of dichogamy 

 as an agent in this question. Much stress is 

 laid on the fact that in many flowers the pistil 

 is mature before or after the stamens ; and 

 this is interpreted as an especial arrangement 

 for cross-fertilization. I pointed out, last year, 

 that this difterence in time varied with the 

 season in many species. But the diflerence is 

 striking in some closely allied species. Bar- 

 barea prsecox and B. vulgaris, two cruciferous 

 plants, are so nearly related that the difference 

 can scarcely be defined. The former, however, 

 has its pistil of about equal length with the sta- 

 mens ; all included in the petals. The stigma 

 certainly receives own pollen simultaneously 

 with the expansion of the petals. But in B. vul- 

 garis the pistil protrudes beyond the closed 

 petals, and is in perfect condition to be fertilized 

 by extraneous pollen before it can be served by 

 its own. But both species make their way 

 equally well through the world. I think no bet- 

 ter illustration could be offered of the fact that a 



