1863.] REVIEWS. 533 



number and position of oi^gans^ on what they are pleased to call 

 morphological principles; but are these explanations success- 

 ful ? When we are told that the abnormal situation of the sta- 

 mens in the Primrose is due to a suppression, or^ as it is now 

 called^ a non-development of an outer series of stamens, which, 

 if present, would have occupied an alternate position, both in re- 

 lation to the lobes of the corolla and to the existing series of 

 stamens, we may receive or reject the hypothesis. This may be 

 true ; but a possible truth is not one on which a prudent person 

 would like to place implicit reliance ; but, granting its truth, the 

 advantage to science by this discovery is infinitesimally small. 



A Primrose with ten stamens would be about as aberrant a 

 form as a Pink with five. Who would establish a law on such a 

 fact, even if it were one? That there are laws to which all di- 

 versities of structure, position, number, and form can be referred, 

 no observant naturalist will dispute. Also, every impartial and 

 candid student will admit the obligations of science to those pa- 

 tient observers who have recently added so much to our know- 

 ledge of structure and physiology. But when morphology is ob- 

 truded on us, as a distinct department of knowledge, to which it 

 is asserted that we owe much, our curiosity is excited to learn 

 the extent of our obligations. When the vegetable physiologist 

 asserts the principle of unity of type, intrinsic identity of leaf 

 and fruit, he may be expressing morphological, but not logical 

 truths. 



But, granting the absence of all inconsistency and obscui'ity, 

 and assuming that the congruency of the entire science of mor- 

 phology is as patent as the symmetry of the plant whose structure 

 it professes to expound, what have we gained from its adoption ? 

 Utility is the practical test whereby all judicious people estimate 

 novelties or discoveries in natural or experimental philosophy. 

 Therefore, as the logician would say, if every invention, or disco- 

 very, or system is to be valued on this principle, what is the 

 worth of morphology ? Can it tell why one Carrot is strong or 

 rank, unfit to be eaten, and another tender and delicately fla- 

 voured ? Does morphology account for some stems being straight, 

 others bending at the base and then erect, and a third class flex- 

 uous or zigzag? Why does the Hop, the Honeysuckle, and the 

 Bindweed climb around certain plants, and in one certain direc- 

 tion ? Why does the Vine clasp the Elm and shrink from the 



