Dr. Lindley’s Natural System of Botany. 303 
“Czsalpinus, Adanson, Jussieu, and Gertner, always take into 
view the direction of the embryo relative to the pericarp merely. 
This method appears to me improper ; first, because it does not in- 
dicate with precision that direction which is most important to be 
understood ; secondly, because the pericarpic direction of the em- 
bryo is often difficult to be ascertained, and is sometimes variable or 
even wholly different in the seeds of the same fruit. I have already 
shown by numerous examples in my Analyse du fruit, that the best 
method is to indicate the direction of the seed relative to the peri- 
carp, and of the embryo relative to the seed.”* 
In very many descriptions, the direction of the embryo relative to 
the seed can only be inferred from the pericarpic direction, or which 
is still more objectionable, the same structure is described by very 
different language in different instances, thus rendering unnecessarily 
complicated an investigation which of itself is not usually difficult. 
We may adduce as an example the five orders comprised in the 
alliance Ranales, which stands at the commencement of Dr. Lind- 
ley’s treatise. We have no means of ascertaining, from the essential 
character of any one of these orders, either the spermic direction and 
position of the embryo, or the situation of the chalaza and micropyle 
relative to the hilum, from which the former may be inferred. It is 
commonly stated that the embryo is situated at the base of the albu- 
men; but it is not specified whether the radical is next the hilum, 
(as in Papaveracee, Nymphzacex, &c.) or points in the opposite 
direction, (as in Nelumbiacez and Cabombacez ;) a matter of essen- 
tial importance, since the seeds result in the one case from the ripen- 
ing of anatropous, and in the other of orthotropous, ovules. 
_ The students of botany in this country are greatly indebted to the 
learned editor and the enterprising publishers of the first American 
edition of this work. May we hope to have our obligations increas- 
ed by the reprint of this greatly improved edition? = = A.G, 
* Ann. Du Museum, vol. 17, p. 446. 
