19 



always considered to be an American form of the European Nuphar 

 luteum. I then stated that, from an examination of the fruit, which 

 is very rare and hardly ever perfectly developed, as well as from differ- 

 ences in the stigmatic disk and habit of the plant, I believed it was only 

 a hybrid between the two species N. advena and N. Kalmiana both of 

 which growinthe same locality. I also stated that,at that time,this opinion 

 had not been confirmed by any other Botanist. When in England last 

 year I examined all the plants of this order in Kew herbarium and 

 there found a few specimens apparently identical with ours labelled "iV 

 luteum, v&v\eij. From^merica." I also inquired who was the highest 

 authority on Nuphar .and was referred to Prof, R. Caspary, the Director 

 of the Botanic- -G^Klens at Konigsberg, in Prussia. I wrote to this 

 gentleman on the point in question, sending him both dried specimens 

 and living roots, and, at the same time, asked him his opinion as to the 

 identity of N. Kalmiana, Viw^h^vfiilxN-piomilum, Smith, supposed to be 

 identical, but concerning which I could not satisly myself. Hi . answer, 

 received on 20th March last, was very satisfactory. He writes, after 

 detailing some most interesting experiments with European species, 

 which would be too technical for reproduction here, but which I may 

 state lasted over a period of 20 years : "Ihavenottheslightest doubt but 

 " that jouv Nuphar luteum, var. C anadense is JVuphar advena + Kalmiana. 

 " It is intermediate between the two, and what is decisive is this, that its 

 " pollen is bad. There was not much pollen in the flowers you sent, but 

 " I got 155 grains, and of these only 7, as far as it is possible to judge 

 " from the dry specimens,had any fovilla ; that is, about 95 per cent,were 

 " bad. Nuphar advena and Kalmiana both have very good pollen." 

 Again, on the other question, he writes : " From many experiments 

 " (some of which he details) I conclude with complete certainty that 

 " Nuphar Kalmiana and N. pumilum are different species, although the 

 '■ morphological differences are very slight, but the two plants abhor each 

 " other physiologically." 



Through the kindness of Mr. Robertson, the Superintendent of 

 the Government gardens, I am enabled to exhibit to you this evening a 

 most remarkable biological specimen, which illustrates better than any- 

 thing I have ever before seen the beautiful truth first enunciated by the 

 poet Goethe, that all the petals, stamens and pistils of a flower are but 



