ClXCHONALES.] GALIACEyE. 769 



cause a peculiarity of habit that cannot be mistaken, and the total absence of stipules, 

 to say nothing of the didymous fruit, affords a certain mark of recognition. Surely 

 there is some inconsistency in separating, l)y the absence of stipules, Caprifoils, whit-h 

 are undistinguishable in habit, Mhile the very same character is rejected when applied 

 to an assemblage of genera all distinctly combined by their habit. The only gi-ouiid 

 upon wliich this is intelligible is that taken by De Candolle and others, who consider tlie 

 apparent leaves of Stellates to be in part true leaves and in part leaf-like stijndes. To 

 this verbal but not real distinction there is this objection, which I conceive quite fatal to 

 it : — If a part of the leaves of each whorl in Galium was stipules, the latter must l)ear 

 a certain proportion to the true leaves ; suppose the whorl to consist of two leaves, each 

 will have two stipules, and consequently the whole number of parts in the whorl must 

 be six, and in all cases the number must be some power of 3. But of the first forty 

 species of Galium in De Candolle's Prodromiis only thirteen conform to this rule ; and 

 the frequent tendency in the whorls to vary from 4*^ to G, or from 5 to 0, or from 6 to H, 

 seems to me an incontrovertible pi'oof that the api)arent leaves of Stellates are true 

 leaves and not a modification of stipules. To this it may be added, that the admitted 

 leaves are so entirely the same as what M. De Candolle conceives to be stipules, that 

 no difference whatever can in general be found in their form, colour, anatomy, or 

 degi'ee of development. Such reasons have, however, not proved satisfactory to 

 Botanists, who with one accord appear to I'ange themselves upon the side of AL De 

 Candolle ; and recently the question has been more particularly agitated by one of the 

 most distinguished winters of this country. 



Mr. Bentham, in an article on Cinisea rubra, pubhshed in the Botanist, page 82, after 

 entering at some length and \\\t\\ great skill into a discussion of the arguments employed 

 on both sides of the question, has decided in favour of the opinion of De Candolle, that a 

 part of the apparent leaves of Stellate plants are stipules. The grounds upon which 

 lie has arrived at this conclusion are essentially the following : — 



1. That the foliaceous organs in Stellates, if viewed as consisting entirely of leaves, 

 do not bear that relation to the angles of the stem which is usual in Dicotyledons ; but 

 that the relation becomes apparent if only two of them are taken as leaves and the rest 

 as stipules. (De Candolle seems influenced by the consideration that it is only two of 

 the appai'ent leaves which have buds in their axils ; but Mr. Bentham does not advert 

 to this.) 



2. That in a number of eases, especially in Asperula, two opposite leaves are much 

 larger than the others. 



3. That in Spermacocese and other tribes of Cinchonads, the stipules are connected 

 with the petiole of the leaf into a sheath, and that this sheath exists in Stellates. 



4. That the number of parts in each whorl is not necessarily some power of 3, 

 but that, taking two of the parts for leaves, it is immaterial by what number of similar 

 parts those two are separated, because the intermediate processes are analogous to the 

 setae of Spermacocese, the number of which is variable. 



Perhaps this question is more important in appearance than in reality, for in some 

 respects it is a mere difference about words ; stipules being rudimentary leaves, and 

 leaves developed stipules. It is, however, connected with some points of speculative 

 interest, especially as regards systematic Botany, and therefore I avail myself of the 

 present opportunity of stating what I conceive to be the objections to Mr. Bentham 's 

 line of argument, and why I still retain my original opinion upon the subject. 



1. With regard to the relation borne by the leaves to the angles of the stem, it is to 

 be observed, that if those foliaceous organs only which are opposite the angles are said 

 to be leaves in Stellates, and the rest stipules, then we must supi)ose that Labiate 

 plants have no leaves, but stipules only, for in that and similar Orders the apparent 

 leaves are never opposite the angles of the stem, but are always placed between them. 

 Nor do I find that the number of angles in the stem of verticillate plants necessarily 

 corresponds with the number of their leaves ; for example, in Dysophylla stellata, 

 where the whorls often consist of ten parts, the stem has still but four angles. Neither 

 can it be admitted that bodies which do not form branches in their axds are 

 therefore not leaves. All foliaceous organs, of whatever kind, and especially stipules, 

 possess that power or not, according to circumstances, as is too well known to 

 require particular proof. Besides, Do CandoUe's statement is not sustamed by fact; 

 for in Aspei-ula the uppermost branches, bearing flowers, are frequently produced 

 alternately with the leaves that form the node from which they spnng, and conse- 

 quently must, m such cases, arise from the seat of one of the supj.osed stipules. It is 

 more probable that the development of branches from a portion only of the leaves 

 is connected with the form of the stem, and the relation which the leaves bear to 

 each other. If the fomi of the stem requires an alternate development of a pair or a 

 triplet of opposite branches, then the first whorl in which the development^ takes place 

 will settle the origin of all that succeed it. For example, if in one whorl of six leaves, 



3d 



