THE JUSSIEUS AND THE NATURAL METHOD. 247 



sWers the u-liole of the plant. Hesitation is everywhere conspicuous, because 

 the inquirer is destitute of a guiding principle — the principle established by 

 Bernard de Jussieu and developed by his nephew Laurent — the principle, in a 

 word, of the subordination of characters. " The natural method," said Linnaeus, 

 "has been the first and will be the last term of botany," {incthodus naturalis 

 primus et ullivius Jinis botanices est et crit.) To this end, in effect, have tended 

 all persistent and comprehensive researches. When, in the middle of the six- 

 teenth century, Gesner indicated the characters drawn from the fructification 

 as the most essential,* he pointed out the right path. " It was Gesner," says 

 M. Cuvier, "who discovered the art of distinguishing and classing plants by the 

 organs of fructification, the art which has, in truth, created scientific botany ;"t 

 when, shortly after Gesner, Ctesalpinus founded the first genera on the root and 

 germ ;| when, profiting by the labors of Gesner and Coesalpinus, though without 

 acknowledgment, Morison established his classification on the seeds -.^ when 

 Magnol wrote the suggestive page just read ;|| when Tournefort excluded 

 from the constitution of genera every other character but that of flowers and 

 fruits ;^ when Linnaeus published his Researches re&joecling Natural Orders ;** 

 these vigorous intellects did but follow, by successive advances, the route 

 opened by Gesner. The problem of the natural method was in the nature of 

 an enigma, which they transmitted from one to another, and of which the two 

 Jussieus, Bernard and Laurent, eventually found the solution. 



The Jussieu family, natives of a small townm the mountains of the Lyonnais, 

 which separate the basin of the Loire from that of the Saone, had then exercised, 

 from sire to son, the function of notary for several centuries, Avhen, about 16S0, 

 onSof its members quitted JMontrotier, near the hamlet which bears their name, 

 in order to seek his fortunes elsewhere. This more enterprising member, whose 

 name was Laurent, having taken his degrees in medicine, established himself 



" * Ex his (floreet fructu) enim potins quam foliis stirpium naturae et cognationes apparent." 

 (Epist. ad Theod. Zuuiggerum.) "His uotis (a fructu, semine et flore) staphisagriam et con- 

 solidara regalem vulgo dictum aconito cod gerem facile deprehendi." (/iu/. ) " Melissa Con- 

 stantiuopolitana ad lamium vel urticam mortuam (podaui niodo videtur accedere, seminis 

 taoieu, unde ego cognationes stirpium indicare soleo, figura diflert." {Epist. ad Adolpli. 

 Occonem.) 



t BiliUdgraphie universelle, article Gesner. 



t "Partes sunt radix et germen : ex horum igitur differentiis prima genera coustituenda 

 sunt." {De plantis, ], cup. 13.) 



^ After claiming for his doctrines equal novelty and infallibility {Plantarum Hist. Univ. 

 Oxoniensis, teu lieiharum distribmio nova, 1715,) pretensions on which the judgment of 

 Magnol has already been seen, Morison proceeds to say: "Notas genericas et essentialcs a 

 semiuibus eorumque similitudine petitas per tabulas cognatiouis et afiBnitatis disponentes 

 stirpes exhibebimus. Ditierentias speciiicas a partibus ignobilioribus, scilicet radice, foliis 

 et caulibus, odore, sapore, colore desumptas adscribemus." 



II It ^X-as Pierre Magnol who replaced Tournefort at the Academy of Sciences as titular 

 meml^er. Magnol did not reside at Paiis, hut against such merit as his no rule is valid. I 

 find in the proceedings of our ancient academy (February 6, 1709) this note of the secretary, 

 Fontenelle ; " I read to the company a letter from M. -Pontchartrain to the Abbe Bignou, 

 dated Versailles, February 5, in which it is anouuced that, for the nomination of the oOth 

 of January, the King has chosen M. de Magnol, though a non-resident, on account of his 

 great reputation in botany. About the time when Morison, Magnol, Eay, published their 

 general views, and thus opened for their successors the way to the study of the botanical 

 affinities, Kivin, by a few pages replete with philosophic views, anticipated Lirtureus in sev- 

 eral points of the reform which was required in the nomenclature. {Introductio Generulis in 

 rem Herbarium, ItJO;).) Morisou's work, Plantarum Unhelliferaruvi Distributio Nora, bears 

 the date of 1072; \i\s^ Plantarum Historia Universalis, thatof 16S0; the work of Ray, Mettiodus 

 Plantarum Nova, S^'c, •d\)\ie'dred in ]682 ; that of Magnol in 161^9; that of Eiviu, the title 

 or which has been just cited, in lb9U ; and the Elements de Botanique of Tournefort in 1()94. 

 In every department, it is from the close of the seventeenth century that the first steps of 

 the great philosiphic movement of the eighteenth century date their commencement. 



H" llxc, cum ita sint, genera plantarum statui non posse liquet, nisi flores simul et fructus 

 adhibeantur." {hugoge in rem HerOariam, y>. ^7, 1700.) 



** Erugmenta Mcthodi Naturalis vel Ordines Nuturales, 1738. 



