S32 OBSERVATIONS ON THE COWSLIP AND PKIMROSE. 



"It will be observed of tliis experiment, that the first change from 

 P. vulgaris was made (so to write) by the liaiid of Nature ; the parent 

 stoclv of my mixed assemblage iiavingbeen a wild variety (as I suppose) 

 of tiie primrose. In tlie experiment of the Rev. W. Herbert, somewhat 

 similar results are said to have been produced by sowing the seeds of a 

 'red cowslip,' — query, an oxlip? In recording his own experiment, it 

 is stated by tlie Rev. J. S. Henslow that he sowed tiie seeds of ' some 

 cowslips' wliich were growing in his garden, and that tiiese produced 

 varieties intermediate between the cowslip and primrose, with one 

 ' perfect primrose.' Remarkably enough, no cowslips appears to liave 

 been produced from the seeds sown by Mr. Henslow ; and I cannot 

 avoid a still lingering doubt whether the seeds may not inadvertently 

 have been taken from plants of the oxlip or caulescent primrose, instead 

 of the cowslip. Moreover, it is now desirable to ascertain whether 

 the ' Westhoe' oxlips are not referrible to the Primula elatior of Jacquin, 

 and equally so with the garden cowslips from which the seeds were 

 collected. In the few following remarks, which naturally arise on 

 these experiments, I assume the accuracy of my own experiment, as 

 before reported ; although a repetition of it is rendered desirable on 

 account of the admitted possibility tliat a seed or seeds of another 

 Primula could have been in the soil used in the flower-pot. But whence 

 the connecting series of varieties in that case ? 



" According to the technical idea of a species, which makes it em- 

 brace all individual examples which have (or might have) descended 

 from a common progenitor, all my plants — whether cowslips, primroses, 

 or varieties of either — must belong to one single species; and thus we 

 fall back upon the Linnseau notion of one ' Primula veris,' with its 

 subordinate varieties of ' elatior' and ' acaulis.' This view will scarce 

 find favour in the eyes of those botanists who labour under the 'species- 

 splitting' monomania. The wild cowslip and primrose have well-marked 

 chaiacfcrs for distinction, and characters which are usually very I'egular 

 and constant. So far they are now dissimilar, and more constantly 

 dissimilar, than are numerous pairs of ' book-species,' which are un- 

 hesitatingly received as really distinct in nature. Unite plants so dis- 

 similar and so readily distinguished, as are the cowslip and primrose, — 

 and what are we then to say about the frivolous attempts at species- 

 making among the Rubi and Polygona in vogue at present, as among 

 the Rosa3 and Mentha^ in former years ? 



" If we allow the cowslip and primrose to be two species, and yet 

 allow that one can pass into the otiier, either directly or through the 

 intermediate oxlip, we abandon the definition of species, as usually given, 

 and fall into the transition-of-species theory, advocated in the ' Vestiges.' 



" I do not see that we get more clear of the difliculty by assuming, 

 without proof thereof, that the ' Claygate Oxlip' is a true example of 

 hybridity. Do hybrids, if fertile, produce at once their own like, the 

 like of each parent, and a progeny of intermediate likeness also ? At 

 best, the hybrid is only half of either species, — and can the half pro- 

 duce the whole ? Sucli an event would assuredly not be ' like producing 

 like' through an endless succession of descents. 



" Let a Tew other cases be adduced, between reputed species equally 

 dissimilar, and we shall be forced to recast our ideas and definition of 



