ON FUNGI. 197 



plant are carried up by the ascending sap into the leaves and 

 flowers, where they expand into perfect Fungi. 



To enter upon the argument against the theory is not my inten- 

 tion at present, as it would occupy more room than you, or time 

 than I have to spare : but it seems to me an almost conclusive 

 prima facie objection to it, that it is so directly opposed to the 

 general scheme and simplicity of nature. We know also that 

 Fungi are to be propagated by their sporules, for we can raise 

 them from them, and to suppose that they can be formed fortui- 

 tously with a prospective contrivance for their future propagation 

 in themselves, is, either to deny that contrivance proves design, 

 and the existence of design that of a designer, or to throw us 

 back upon the former alternative of equivocal generation, as 

 given in the beginning of the article. 



1 have, though shortly, I hope satisfactorily shown how little 

 the above theory has to support it. I shall not trespass further 

 on your space than to copy a paragraph from the opinion of one 

 of the first mycologists of the age, of one equally excellent as a 

 man, and as a botanist, the Eev. M. J. Berkeley. 



" It is not to be denied that difficulties about the appearance of 

 Fungi, as of various other plants and animals, are often great ; 

 but it seems to me rash and precipitate in the extreme, because 

 of a few points which at present baffle our powers of investigation, 

 to have recourse to a principle which its supporters, at least as 

 many as are of an humble and submissive frame of mind, dare 

 not follow out into all its consequences. For my own part 1 can 

 affirm, without hesitation, that I have never read a single essay of 

 these writers without being struck with the utter inconclusiveness 

 of their reasonings, and with their strange oversight of points, 

 which make against them so plainly and palpably that the most 

 ordinary and unprejudiced reader could not fail to seize them." 

 {Berkeley in Hook. Br. H. II. 2. 7.*) 



I cannot refrain from another admirable quotation from an 

 equally distinguished botanist — 



" Let us not be led astray by specious theories and imaginary 

 facts concerning bodies so far beyond the cognizance of our 

 senses ; but in the absence of demonstrative evidence to the con- 

 trary, let us believe the great Author of Nature to be consistent 

 witli himself in all his works, and to have taken care to enable 

 the most humble seaweed to be multiplied by some means as 

 certain and unchangeable as is provided for the most stately lord 



