362 



words : — " That the carpel is a leaf, is thus proved to demonstration ; 

 and as all compound fruits are collections of carpels, as has already 

 been stated, it follows that all fruits, of whatever kind, are modified 

 leaves." I cannot admit that, in all the arguments used, there has 

 been anything adduced bearing even an approach to a demonstrative 

 proof of fruits being modified leaves. 1 may want sufficient penetra- 

 tion, indeed, but it appears to me that the only thing really demon- 

 strated is the inanity of the theory. 



The next step is " to show that ovules, and consequently seeds, are 

 also alterations of leaves. As it appears from what has just been said 

 that ovules grow upon the margins of a carpellary leaf, there will at 

 fi.rst sight be a difficulty in reconciling such a function with the well- 

 known fact that leaves do not in general bear anything analogous to 

 ovules." But I can see no proof whatever of ovules growing on the 

 margin of a leaf; and neither in the description nor figure of the spu- 

 rious leaflet is mention made, nor an appearance represented, of any- 

 thing of the kind. I believe that no instance of a leaf producing seeds 

 has ever been seen, and it is a phenomenon so allied to the impos- 

 sible, that we may presume it never will. The author observes, how- 

 ever, that "in a common Indian plant, called Bryophyllum, the leaves 

 are capable of forming young plants in the crenelling of their border." 

 In Malaxis paludosa " buds [i. e., bulbs) are constantly formed at the 

 border of the leaves." It is further stated that " it is to buds, or bulbs, 

 that ovules are to compared ; their integuments are to be considered 

 rudimentary leaves, analogous to the scales of a leaf-bud, and they 

 have actually been seen by Henslow, Engelmann and others in cer- 

 tain cases of malformation." — P. 61. 



I cannot see that, in all this, there is the slightest grain either of 

 proof or probability that seeds are " alterations of leaves." From a 

 remote antiquity it has been well known that Nature does not limit 

 the production of plants to seeds ; but though buds are the most fre- 

 quent substitutes for them, and although buds grow occasionally on 

 leaves, these are new productions, there is no proof whatever of their 

 being alterations of leaves, and they possess properties which the 

 leaves do not ; the leaf dies and is gone, but the life of the bud con- 

 tinues, and, when favourably situated, it will grow into as perfect a 

 plant as a seed would do, and so far the analogy holds good ; but this 

 is no proof whatever of metamorphosis. If I plant a potato in the 

 earth, or any portion of a potato containing an eye or bud, that bud 

 will grow into a perfect plant, producing leaves, flowers, and abun- 

 dance of seeds ; but the bud (let us call the potato a tuber, an under- 



