194 ORGANOGRAPHY. BOOK I. 



2. Capsella, the same, if small and one-seeded. 



3. Nux, externally hard. 



4. Nucula, externally hard, small, and one-seeded. 

 .5. Drupa, externally soft, internally hard. 



6. Pomum^ fleshy or sncculent, and large. 



7. Bacca, fleshy or succulent, and small. 



8. Bacca sicca, fleshy when unripe, dry when ripe, and 

 then distinguishable from the capsule by not being brown. 



'. . ' r the pericarps of certain natm'al orders. 



10. Siliqua, J 



11. Amphispermium, a pericarpium which is of the same 

 figure as the seed it contains. 



In more recent times there have been three principal 

 attempts at classing and naming the different modifications of 

 fruit ; namely, those of Richard, Mirbel, and Desvaux. These 

 writers have all distinguished a considerable number of varia- 

 tions, of which it is important to be aware for some purposes, 

 although their nomenclature is not much employed in practice. 

 But, in proportion as the utility of a classification of fruit con- 

 sists in its theoretical explanation of structure rather than in 

 a strict applicability to practice, it becomes important that it 

 should be founded upon characters which are connected with 

 internal and physiological distinctions rather than with external 

 and arbitrary forms. Viewing the subject thus, it is not to be 

 concealed that, notwithstanding the undoubted experience and 

 talent of the writers jvist mentioned, their carpological systems 

 are essentially defective. Besides this, each of the three writers 

 has felt himself justified in contriving a nomenclature at vari- 

 ance with that of his predecessors, for reasons which it is diffi- 

 cult to comprehend. 



If a complete carpological nomenclature is to be established, 

 it ought to be carried farther than has yet been done, and to 

 depend upon principles of a more strictly theoretical charac- 

 ter. I have accordingly ventured to propose a new arrange- 

 ment, in which an attempt has been made to adjust the syno- 

 nyms of carpological writers, and in which the names that 

 seem to be most legitimate are retained in every case, their 

 definitions only being altered; previously to which I shall 

 briefly explain the methods of Richard, Mirbel, and Desvaux. 



