FRO:\l TIIK USUAL STRUCTURE OF SEEDS. 361 



I am not aware tliat sucli an economy lias liitherto ])een 

 described ; I have observed it, however, in several plants 

 belonging to very different families, and of essentially 

 different strnctnres. 



The first of these is Leontice tJialicfroides of Linna^ns, 

 CauJophyllum ihnlictroidcs of JMichanx, who has fonnded his 

 new genns on a difference of frnit, the natnre of which he 

 has entirely misnnderstood. It is remarkable that its real 

 structure slionld have escaped so accurate an observer as 

 M. Richard, through whose hands it is generally understood 

 Michaux's work passed previous to its publication ; but the 

 fact may at least serve to show how entirely unexpected 

 such an economy must have been even to tliat excellent 

 carpologist. 



My observations were made in the summer of 1812, on a 

 plant of Leontice iludictroides, which flowered and ripened 

 fruit in the royal gardens at Kew. An examination of the 

 unim])regnated ovarium proved it to be in every respect of 

 the same structure with that of the other species of Leoniice ; 

 and essentially the same with the whole order of Berherides, 

 to which this genus belongs. A careful inspection of the 

 fruit, in different states, ])roved also that the " Drupa stipi- 

 tata " of Michaux is in reality a naked seed, that in a very 

 early stage had burst its pericarpium, the withered re- [iw 

 mains of A^hich were in most cases visible at the base of the 

 ripe seed. The first error of Michaux naturally led to a 

 series of mistakes ; and the naked seed being considered by 

 him as a drupa, the albumen, which is of a horny texture, 

 is described as a " nux cornea crassissima," and the embryo 

 itself as the seed. 



But although this account of the fruit of Leontice thalic- 

 troides be in no respect similar to that given by ]\Iichaux, 

 it may perhaps be considered by some as still differing 

 sufficiently from Leontice to authorise the establishment of 

 a distinct genus ; and that, therefore, the name CauJopliijllam 

 may be retained, and its character derived from the remark- 

 able circumstance described, namely, the early rupture of 

 its pericarpium. I believe, however, it will be found more 

 expedient to reduce it again to Leontice. 



