104 Mr. J. Miers on the Solanacese. 



varieties of development, and consequently figure in herbaria as 

 numerous and distinct species. 



In concluding these observations tending to justify the con- 

 clusions I have formed after a long and careful examination of 

 the whole family of the Solanacece, it is necessary to ofi'er a 

 few words of apology, especially after the reproachful remarks 

 of Dr. Sendtner before quoted. It will be seen that the dif- 

 ferent subjects there treated upon were published at frequent 

 intervals during a space of seven years, in detached portions, 

 without regard to any system of an'angement. At the com- 

 mencement I had not the most distant thought of extending 

 these investigations to the length they have been carried, step by 

 step : sufficient proof of this is seen in the preface to the first 

 memoir in 1845 (Lond. Journ. Bot.) and in the first number of 

 my 'Illustrations' in 1846, my object, as there shown, being 

 merely to publish the drawings and details of the plants I had 

 collected abroad ; but in attempting to define in succession the 

 particular genus to which these plants belonged, I found myself 

 continually at fault : hence arose the necessity of comparing them 

 with those of other collections, among which may be mentioned 

 the rich herbarium of Sir W. Hooker, who most liberally opened 

 everything to my inspection, and those of the British Museum 

 and Linnsean Society: these distant journeys, necessarily frequent, 

 much increased the difficulties of my progress, for my only plan 

 of procedure was to make sketches of each plant for comparison 

 with others at a distance and with my own notes at home. The 

 results were published in desultory succession as the subjects 

 presented themselves to my notice : had the whole of these in- 

 quiries been completed before the publication of any portion, 

 and each analysis compared carefully with others, aided by a 

 knowledge of the real structure of the rest, there would have 

 been more consecutiveness and uniformity in the general defini- 

 tions. Some indulgence may therefore be claimed and allowance 

 made for the many faults that have necessarily resulted from this 

 mode of procedure, the only one at my command. Notwith- 

 standing the manner in which the materials are thus scattered 

 throughout those pages, much that is useful may indubitably be 

 gleaned, both from the text and the drawings, towards our know- 

 ledge of the members of this family and their respective affinities : 

 a great many new facts have been added, and others previously 

 known have been corrected ; some progress has also been made 

 towards a record of the essential as well as differential characters, 

 and towards defining the more exact limits of each genus, and 

 this has been throughout the full extent of my aim. 



From what has been shown in the preceding remarks, it will 

 be seen that much yet remains to be done before we obtain a 



