282 IN A GLOUCESTERSHIRE GARDEN 



use of which has never been satisfactorily accounted 

 for. Some of these variations are so different from the 

 parent type that they used to be ranked as monstro- 

 sities. They are no longer so ranked, for one of the 

 good services which Darwin did for the natural sciences 

 was to show us that there are no such things in nature 

 as monstrosities. What are called by that name are 

 only hints of the possibilities of nature, and are even 

 proofs of the strict laws under which plant-life exists, 

 for these monstrosities never go beyond well-defined 

 limits, and in course of time often revert to the 

 parent type. And that this waa so had not escaped 

 the notice of other deep thinkers before Darwin. 

 Nearly two hundred years before, Isaac Barrow, in his 

 twelfth sermon on the Creed (a sermon well worth the 

 study of all students in natural science), said 



1 That which we call a monster is not unnatural in regard to 

 the contexture of causes, but arises no less methodically than 

 anything most ordinary ; and it also hath its good end and 

 use, well serving to illustrate the beauty and convenience of 

 nature's usual course.' 



And he quotes Aristotle ovStv yivcrai irapa. 



Another excellent lesson which my garden teaches 

 me is my own ignorance. I once asked one of our 

 most learned botanists a simple question about some 



