12 The Evolution of Fruits. 



to the fruit as a guide to tlieii* affinities. It is impossible 

 here to do more than indicate my results, which have far 

 exceeded my original hopes. 



A very slight knowledge of plants convinces one of the 

 great natural importance of the distinction, first pointed out 

 by the botanical glory of Essex, John Kay, between Mono- 

 cotjdedons and Dicotyledons. Adopting this primary division, 

 and considering Mr. Bentham's NudifortF, as the lowest 

 among Monocotyledons, we find that we have many mono- 

 carpellary fruits in very rudimentary flower-types, followed 

 by a rmg of apocarpous follicles, generally six in number, in 

 the flowering-rush [Butomus], and by a spiral of more 

 numerous ones in the water-plantain (Alisma) ; but that 

 sjmcarpy is early originated (even in the Lemnacea), the 

 fruit becoming capsular, and that succulence also originates 

 early (in the AracecB). We constantly find in tracing the 

 evolution of fruits that Nature arrives at the same result, 

 such as the capsule or nuculane, by various routes; hence the 

 practical uselessness of an artificial grouping of fruits. 



Among Mr. Bentham's CoronariecE, a syncarpous fruit of 

 three carpels asserts itself as the tj^pical monocotyledonous 

 fi'uit ; succulence re-appears, as in Asparagus and Buscus ; 

 and we get the ]3reviously-mentioned reduction in the cocoa- 

 nut and date, accompanied in the former with that develop- 

 ment of woody texture in the pericarp, which proves an 

 eft'ectual protection against the action of sea-water, if not 

 against crabs or monkeys. 



The Glumifiora I consider merely as reduced from the last- 

 mentioned type, their one-seeded caryopsis illustrating a 

 general principle which should have been before stated, that 

 when numerous small flowers form a crowded inflorescence 

 (as also in CompositcB and UmhelJifercE) we have a reduction in 

 the number of carpels answering to a reduced need of them. 



Among Dicotyledons my examination led me to recognise 

 four great groups, for which I select the names ThaJamiflora, 

 DisciJJorcp, PeryfiincE, and Bicarpellatce. Of these the second 

 seems undoubtedly a branch-phylum from the first, and the 

 fourth probably from the third. Among the ThalamijiorcB 



