NORMAL STRUCTURE OF CRUCIFEROUS FLOWERS. 269 
calice glabre non hispide, ses divisions calicinales beaucoup moins glan- 
duleuses, ses fleurs roses, son fruit d'un beau rouge. Votre plante est 
totalement différente des groupes du R. sepium, Thuill., et R. rubi- 
ginosa, L., et ne peut pas être comparée avec ces espèces. Par les 
feuilles parsemées de glandes en dessous il s'éloigne du Canine à 
feuilles velues; il est aussi bien différente du R. mollissima, Fries! 
La vraie place de l'espéce anglaise est, selon moi, dans la section 
Rubiginose, à côté du R. fetida, Bastard. 
ON THE NORMAL STRUCTURE OF CRUCIFEROUS 
FLOWERS. 
By W. G. SurrB, Esq. 
In stating my views on the normal structure of the floral organs of 
Crucifere, it may not be out of place to show how I arrived at them. 
If we take a flower of the genus Cheiranthus (Fig. 1), carefully 
note the arrangement of the stamens, glands, etc., and assume that 
R 
"yer SEP 
i 
wa 
various organs are suppressed, the difficulty presents itself of ascertain- 
ing whether the gland-like bodies represent the elementary conditions 
of pod-cells, stamens, or petals. The question then naturally arises as 
to whether there may be any other genus of Cruciferz, where these ar- 
rangements are reversed—where organs suppressed in one are developed 
in another, and vice vers. The unusual petal-form of the genus Iberis 
prompted me to examine Ideris amara (Fig. 2), and I was fully repaid 
for my pains. It was manifest that whilst the two pod-cells were in 
