5 8 Journal of Travel and Natural History. 



cences more different than those of Begonia and Casparya, since 

 the wings of the Begonias have no disposition to divide themselves, 

 while, in the true Casparyas, the wing or angle of each loculus 

 divides itself. There are, according to the " Genera," species of 

 Casparya non-dehiscent; but then either a genus should be made 

 of them, or rather we should regard them as forming a section, for 

 between a dehiscent fruit and an indehiscent fruit, there is some- 

 times less difference than between a loculicide capsule* and a 

 septicide capsule, the absence of dehiscence being perhaps due to 

 something else than a difference of nervation, or the position of 

 the loculi. One may see by this example, that the citation of the 

 names of species in the "Genera" is sometimes desirable. This 

 would make it a little longer ; but to inspire more confidence is an 

 object worth the additional length. Besides, when one goes 

 through the labour of analyzing so many species, it is a matter of 

 regret that the public should not profit more by it. 



The tendency of Messrs. Bentham and Hooker to unite, whether 

 it be species, or genera, or families — a tendency habitual 

 with them, and which to some appears exaggerated — appears 

 to us to flow almost per force from the successive discoveries 

 which are taking place. The more the cases are filled, the more 

 intermediate forms multiply. Varieties formerly neglected or 

 unknown come to unite species ; new species make the transition 

 between genera ; new genera between families. One is obliged 

 to multiply the steps of classification and to round in each of them. 

 To thoroughly understand that march, and at the same time several 

 of the questions relating to the natural method, it is well to employ 

 a mode of representation very graphic and sufficiently simple. 



Let us suppose a botanist, very exact, a very good observer, and 

 very judicious in the appreciation of relations. If he has devoted a 

 sufficient time to the study of a, family, if he has seen all its forms, 

 from the smallest variations of species up to genera, tribes, and 

 even neighbouring families, he would represent to himself the 

 beings which compose that region of the vegetable kingdom as a 

 vast archipelago. The distribution of forms on a plane surface 

 will be, I admit, often insufficient ; he would require to employ 

 the three dimensions ; and still the supposed botanist would have 

 difficulty in exhibiting the extreme complication of facts by the 

 means of such material procedure. Nevertheless, there are cases 

 where the affinities may be represented by means of a sort of geo- 

 graphical map ; and to simplify the argument we shall suppose one 



