246 



lutely indispensable. The description above given is that which I conceive 

 proper to explain the views now taken upon the subject, in consequence of the 

 discovery by Mr. Brown of the ovula of the whole order being naked ; and it 

 will probably be found to offer a more intelligible account of the fructification 

 than is to be met with in even the most recent systematic works. It is not ex- 

 pedient to enter here upon an inquiry into the ideas that botanists have suc- 

 cessively entertained upon this subject. Those who are desirous of informing 

 themselves upon this point, will find all they can desire in the Appendix to 

 Captain King's Voyage to New Holland, and in Richard's Mtmoires svr les 

 Conijercs et les Cijcadies. It may, however, be useful to advert briefly to the 

 principal theories which have met with advocates. These are, firstly, that the 

 pistilliferous flowers consist of a bilocular ovarium having a style in the form of an 

 external scale, an opinion held by Jussieu, Smith, and Lambert ; secondly, that 

 they have a minute cohering perianthium, and an external additional envelope 

 called the cupula: this view was taken by Schubert, Mirbel, and others; 

 thirdly, that they have a monosepalous calyx cohering more or less with the 

 ovarium, contracted and often tubular at the apex, with a lobed, or glandular, 

 or minute entire limb, an erect ovarium, a single pendulous ovulum, no style, 

 and a minute sessile stigma : this explanation is that of Richard, published in 

 his memoir upon the subject in 1826. It appears, however, from the observa- 

 tions of Mr. Brown, that the pistil of Conifers is a naked ovulum, the in- 

 teguments of which have been mistaken for floral envelopes, and the apex of 

 whose nucleus has been considered a stigma. Of the accuracy of this view 

 there is probably, at this time, little difference in opinion. These pistils, or 

 naked ovula, are in the cone-bearing genera 2 in number, and they originate 

 from the larger scales of the cone towards their base, have an inverted posi- 

 tion, and occupy the same relative place in Conifers and in Zamia, a genus of 

 Cycadeae. Now, as there cannot be any doubt of the perfect analogy that ex- 

 ists between the scales of the cone of Zamia and the fruit-bearing leaves of 

 Cycas, the former differing from the latter only in each being reduced to 2 ovula, 

 and to an undivided state ; so there can be no doubt of the equally exact ana- 

 logy between the scales of Cordferae and Zamia, and therefore the former would 

 be called reduced leaves if the general character of the tribe was to produce a 

 highly developed foliage ; but as the foliage of Conifers is in a much more con- 

 tracted state than the scales of their cones, the latter must be understood to be 

 the leaves of Conifers in a more developed state than usual. That the scales 

 of the cone really are metamorphosed leaves, is apparent not only from this 

 reasoning, but from the following facts. They occupy the same position with 

 respect to the bractere as the leaves do to their membranous sheaths ; they sur- 

 round the axis of growth as leaves do, and usually terminate it ; but in some 

 cases, as often in the Larch, the axis continues to elongate beyond them, and 

 leaves them collected round it in .the middle. In Araucaria they have abso- 

 lutely the same structure as the ordinary leaves ; and finally they sometimes 

 assume the common appearance of leaves, as is represented in Richard's me- 

 moir, tab. 12., in the case of a monstrous Abies. The scales of the cones of Coni- 

 fers and strobilaceous Cycadea3 are therefore to these orders, what carpellary 

 leaves are to other plants. With regard to the staminiferous flowers, it is obvious 

 that in the Ginkgo, the Larch, the Cedar of Lebanon, the Spruce, and the like, 

 each anther is formed of a partially converted scale, analogous to the indurated 

 carpellary scale of the pistils ; and therefore each amentum consists of a num- 

 ber of monandrous naked staminiferous flowers, collected about a common 

 axis. Some botanists, however, consider each staminiferous catkin as a single 

 monadelphous flower, which is impossible. But in the Yew the sterile flowers 

 consist of a peltate scale, around which are arranged several polliniferous ca- 

 vities ; while, in Araucaria, these cavities occupy one side only of an ordinary 



