Mr. J. Miers on the Solanacese. 103 



led to his error in placing that genus among the Solanaceee, and 

 he does not notice the erect position and basal insertion of its 

 ovules, so contrary to all that is met with in that family. I 

 merely quote these instances, out of a number of others, to show 

 that the most accurate observers and the most learned men are 

 as liable to errors and omissions as those of less pretensions, and 

 they ought consequently to look charitably on the faults of others. 

 The necessity of groping, as it were, in the dark in search of 

 tangible facts, and treading the path firmly at every step, giving 

 thus a desultory character to these communications, added to the 

 rigour of detail, originating in my professional habit of proving 

 everything by rule and by positive demonstration, may justify 

 the charge made by Dr. Sendtner, who says of me, regarding 

 these contributions, " rei botanicse parum profuit : veras disci- 

 plinse botanicse notiones vilipendens," &c, {he. cit. p. 225) ; and 

 this dullness may account for my utter inability to comprehend 

 the more refined and transcendental definitions of the German 

 school. This accomplished botanist, describing in his elaborate 

 work the nature of the inflorescence of the Solanacece (p. 181), 

 has employed an extent of definition that would occupy ten close 

 octavo pages, in order to describe that which appears to me might 

 be made far more intelligible in almost as many lines. After 

 giving my best attention to this elaborate diagnosis, I am yet 

 unable to comprehend the finer distinctions of " i-ecaulescent, 

 concaulescent, estalechic, antidromical or homodromical " deve- 

 lopments and their various combinations ; nor can I perceive the 

 utility of employing other new terms, such as " dichasia, concinna, 

 cormanthse, metapodia, hypopodia," and a number of others, in 

 order to explain what we commonly understand by a simple or 

 compound cyme or corymb, expressions long in use and compre- 

 hensible to everybody, without the necessity of employing words, 

 involving ideas of development founded wholly on hypothesis. 

 Besides, after all, the fact is known to all horticulturists that in 

 the same species its habit and the development of its inflorescence 

 are subject to much variation if grown in different soils, in a hot 

 or cold temperature, in a moist or dry atmosphere, in exposed or 

 open situations ; hence the characters derivable from such sources 

 are always variable, while those features observed in the develop- 

 ment of the flowers and fruit are far more constant and always to 

 be relied upon for scientific purposes. This consideration leads 

 us naturally to inquire how many out of the 900 kinds of Sola- 

 num enumerated by M. Dunal ought not to be considered as 

 genuine species ? There are many individuals of this genus that 

 are perfect weeds and have become quite cosmopolitan, such for 

 instance as Solanum nigrum, S. dulcamara, S. pseudocapsicum, 

 S. torvum, &c. ; these under different circumstances assume many 



