f HIGHNESS ' OF AUSTRALIAN VEGETATION 468 



Kew : December 26 [?], 1858. 

 I wish we could have a little work together. When 

 shall we ever get to a reasonable agreement ? I am horrified 

 to find that you think AustraHan forms lower than Old 

 World ones ; because under every method of determining 

 high and low in Botany the Australian vegetation is the highest 

 in the worM.^ 



1. The proportion of Phanerog. to Cryptog. is infinitely 

 greater in Austraha than elsewhere (this as being a mere 

 condition of cHmate I do not give much for). 



2. Monocot. to Dicot. are in same proportion as else- 

 where. 



3. Petaloid (higher Monocot.) are in greater ratio to 

 Glumaceous in Australia than in Europe. 



4. The four Orders of Dicots, considered by different 

 systematists as highest, are Compositae, Myrtaceae, Legu- 

 minosae and the Ranunculaceous, including Dilleniaceae 

 &c. Now, I believe (I have not tabulated yet) that all 

 these are in greater proportion and more varied in Australia 

 than in any other country. 



5. Then, granting with the heretical J. H. ! that Conifers 

 are highest Phaenogs., and they are as numerous and most 

 varied. 



6. There are very few Monochlamideous or Achlamideous 

 Dicots in Austraha. 



Now I have been using your line of argument to my own 

 purposes in this fashion : ' Granting with Darwin, that the 

 principle of selection tends to extermination of low forms 

 and multiplication of high, it is easy to account for the 

 general high development and peculiarity of Australian 

 forms of plants, these being the remnants of an extensive 

 Flora of great antiquity and which covered a very extensive 

 and now developed Southern continent, &c., &c., &c.' How 

 often do I say all our arguments are two-edged swords. 



Again, some AustraHan plants are rapidly running wild 

 in India, as Casuarina, and I beheve several Acacias in the 

 Nilgherries and some other Leguminosae. 



We cannot argue anything by contrasting the multiplica- 



^ Replying on the 30th, Darwin explains his meaning to have been the 

 competitive superiority of the Old World plants when they met the Australian 

 (M.L. i. 114). See also the letter to A. Gray of January 2, 1858, p. 480. 



