AFFINITIES. 969 
I have often been struck with a remark by Lindley and 
Hutton elsewhere referred to*, that Monocotyledons are as 
perfect, if not more perfect, than Dicotyledons. Such an asser- 
tion is however contrary to one of the most universal truths, 
viz. the gradation of forms which this distinguished author 
himself advocates in the circular theory of natural affinities, 
a theory which reposes as it were upon the basis of a due 
gradation of form. 
Premising that our ideas of perfection are of course only 
comparative, it is easily shewn that Dicotyledons are more 
highly organized than Monocotyledons, both in their organs 
of vegetation and reproduction. With regard to the former, 
we have Monocotyledons, and more especially their so consi- 
dered types of perfection, Palms, limited in their growth 
to one point, and limited probably in the duration of life ; and 
although we have their leaves presenting some analogies to 
those of Dicotyledons, especially to their coriaceous structure, 
they are in all cases deficient in complexity arising from com- 
pound structure of their articulation with the stem, and hence 
their perfection. And with regard to their reproductive or- 
gans, we have only a relative perfection in their vast number, 
and produce; this is probably to compensate for their vege- 
tative deficiencies; we have no complexity of envelopes, no 
irregularity, but as in most other Endogens, an undeviating 
adhesion to a ternary number and an extremely low degree of 
petaloid development. Again with regard to the fruit, we 
have the development by no means carried to a late, i. e. a 
high point, for this would give a highly developed embryo, 
and a small developed albumen. 
There is no greater proof of simplicity of structure than that 
of regularity, hitherto supposed to denote perfection, for we 
find it in all cases of great complexity, an invariable accom- 
paniment of early growth. 
* Palms of Brit. India, Caleutta: 1850. p. ix. 
