THE JUSSIEUS AND THE NATURAL METHOD. 247 



siclers the wlwJe of the plant. Hesitation is everywhere conapicuous, 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," {methodus naturalis 

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

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

 leeuth 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 tmtli, created scientific botany ;"t 

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

 germ ;| when, profiting by the labors of Gesner and Ca?salpinu3, though without 

 acknowledgment, Morisou established his classification on the seeds ;§ v/hen 

 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 Linna?us published his Researches res|)ectiug 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 tv/o 

 Jussieus, Bernard and Laurent, eventually fouLd the solution. 



The Jussieu family, natives of a small town in 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, when, about 1680, 

 ong'of its members quitted Montrotier, 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 (tlore et fractu) enim jwtins quam foliis stirpium naturae et coguationes apparent. " 

 {Epist.ad Tlicod. Zuinggeriim.) "His notis (afrnctu, semine et flore) stapbisagriaui et cou- 

 solidara regalem vulgo dictum aconito congerem facile deprehendi." (/iiJ.) " Melissa C'ou- 

 tautiuopolitana ad lamium vel urticam mortuam quodam modo videtur aceedere, semiuis 

 Jameu, uude ego coguationes etirpiimi iudicare soleo, figura differt." {Epist. ad Adolpk. 

 Occonem.) 



t Bthliographie universdte, article Gesner. 



t '"Partes sunt radix et germen : ex borum igitiir diiTereutiis prima genera constituenda 

 sunt." (De plantis, ], cap. 13.) 



§ After claiming for his doctrines equal novelty and infallibility (Plantnrum Hist. Univ. 

 Oxoniensis, seu herbarum distrihutio nova, 1735,) pretensions on ■which the judgment of 

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

 semiuibus eorumque similitudiue petitas per tabulas cognationis et aiSnitatis disponentes 

 stirpes exhibebiuius. Differentias specilicas a partibus ignobilioribus, scilicet radice, foliis 

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



II It was Pierre Magnol who replaced Tournefort at the Academy of Sciences as titular 

 member. Magnol did not reside at Paris, but against such merit as his no rule is valid. I 

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

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

 dated Versailles, February 5, in which it is anounced that, for the nomination of the 30tli 

 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, Ray, published their 

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

 afiSnities, Riviu, by a few pages replete with philosophic views, anticipated Liunoous in sev- 

 eral points of the reform which was required in the nomenclatiue. {Introductiu Gcneralis in 

 rem Herbarium, IGDO.) Morison's work, Plantarum Uiibdtiferaruni Distrihutio Nota, Ijear.s 

 the date of 1672; h\H Plantarum Historia Universalis, thatof IGSO; the work of Ray, Mt:t/iodus 

 Plantarum Nova, S^c, appeared in lGd2 ; that of Magnol in 1689 ; that of Rivin, the title 

 or which has been just cited, in 1()90 ; and tho Elements de Botanique of Tournefort in 1694. 

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

 adhibeantur." {Isagogc in rem Herbariam, p. 57, 1700.) 



** Fragmenta Methodi Naturalis vel Ordines Naturales, 1738. 



