23 



now present may have seen, showing the permanence of types in plants, 

 not in the shape of fossil remains, but in those of which we have the earliest 

 historical knowledge. We are there enabled to see the crocus and the lotus, 

 one or two species of moss, and two or three more plants that have been 

 taken out of mummy-cases, and which date back three and probably four 

 thousand years, side by side with specimens of the very same flowers recentlv 

 gathered and dried in Cairo, the species and varieties of the crocus and lily 

 being the same as are found at the present day the crocus, as far as I can 

 see, being identical with that which is found in the Campagna, and generally 

 in the outskirts of Rome. I suppose the permanence of this type is to be 

 attributed to the fact that it has always been a non- cultivated species. I 

 may add, that growers in the neighbourhood of Cairo have tried to produce 

 different species ; but the more I go about the more am I struck with the 

 great similarity shown by the fossil remains found in England and the 

 plants growing in Egypt at the present day. The impressions of the leaves, 

 and the leaves themselves, of the palms and magnolias that are dug up close 

 to Bournemouth are just the same in appearance as those in Egypt now, and 

 serve as evidence of a tropical climate at one time in our own land. 



Mr. J. HASSELL thanked Mr. James for his interesting and instructive 

 paper. For his own part, he (Mr. Hassell) did not know much about fossil 

 botany, but he had taught children a little about the botany of the present 

 day, and be had been greatly struck with the remark made by a girl a 

 short time ago. He had placed on the table the fossil impression of a fern 

 from the coal measures. They had been talking about the nervation of 

 plants, and he had been examining different specimens in order to show 

 that the nervation of the dicotyledons was different to that of the mono- 

 cotyledons, and that of the acotyledons different from either of the others. 

 The girl said, " That cannot be a very old thing, sir, for it is exactly like 

 this leaf," at the same time showing a leaf she had in her hand, the leaf of 

 a recent fern. This is a very remarkable thing, and the more we knew of 

 the structure of plants the better were we able to see that no possible 

 means within themselves could have produced the differences that were 

 observable, and, consequently, the more confidently could we take up a posi- 

 tion against the fascinating doctrine of evolution. He thought it very 

 desirable that the marked distinctions of species, which Mr. James had 

 shown were presented even from the very earliest ages, should be brought 

 prominently before the young, by their teachers. Those who believed in 

 evolution took advantage of every occasion which presented itself to in- 

 oculate the rising generation with their views. Why, then, should not the 

 believers in special creation do the same ? 



Mr. W. P. JAMES, F.L.S. I was much pleased to hear Dr. Carruthers 

 say he does not believe in synthetic types of plants, and, if be were 

 still present, I would explain to him that the last paragraph of my 

 paper, headed, " Do Synthetic Types prove Evolution 1 " is written from an 

 entirely neutral point of view. I do not say that I believe in synthetic 



