224 
es, so müsste man nach dem zugehôürigen Carpelle fragen, 
welches aber nicht vorhanden ist” p. 230 !). 
And somewhat further: , Wir dürfen nunmehr ganz 
allgemein sagen, dass alle Eichen, behüllte und unbehüllte 
auf einem Fruchtblatte entspringen oder von ihm abhängig 
sind. Kein Eichen ohne Carpell” (p. 232). After having 
stated this axioma Celakovsk\ (40) tries to homologize 
the integument of the Angiosperms with the sporange- 
envelopments of the lower plants. In the first place he 
makes a comparison between the indusium of the ferns and 
the integument, and though it seems rather unjustifiable 
to connect in a direct way, a leaflet of a fern with a 
carpel from an ordinary flower, he yet says according to 
a comparison with a proliferated ovule of Hesperis ,,Somit 
ist auch der Blattzipfel eines Farnblattes, der das Indusium 
(den Schleier) auf seiner Unterseite trägt, das Aequivalent 
des äusseren Ovularinteguments von Hesperis” (p. 304). 
His further papers, published on this subject, amount 
to this, that he wants to defend the theory he once put 
forth, and though he gives many sagacious proofs, the 
suppositions from which he starts are not quite certain, 
so that his method of investigation is the exact counter- 
part of what would be desirable in this case. For in 
stead of controlling a same organ in its phylogenetical 
development from low to high, he first states the mor- 
phological value of nucellus and integument in their 
highest degree of development and then he puts the 
organs of lower plants aequivalent to them. 
As I said already in the beginning it seems to me the 
weak point in Celakovsk\'s theory, that he has immedi- 
ately assumed, that the proliferations of the Angiosperms 
would be retrogressive phenomena. Though lateron he 
begins to doubt this view and agrees with the possibility, 
Lateron he is obliged to accept an integument in the Conifers. 
