1839] 



FARMERS' REGISTER 



327 



deed the true cause, we call the supposition a the- 

 ory ; where they do not thus naturally result, but 

 still, without doing any great violence to reason, 

 may be considered as resultintr from the supposed 

 cause, we term the supposition a hypothesis. 

 Theory and hypothesis do not differ from each 

 other in their essential character, but only in their 

 degree of probability. A hypothesis may be 

 looked upon as a probable iheory ; or a theory, as 

 a very probable hypothesis. When we account 

 for any phenomenon, by tracing it to the cause 

 supposed in theory, and assigning the manner in 

 which it must have been produced, in case the 

 supposed cause be the true one, we are said to 

 treat the subject theoretically. Such is the mean- 

 ing ol these terms, when strictly used in treatises 

 on natural science. AVe sometimes, though more 

 rarely, use them in a looser way ; meaning by 

 theoretical reasoning, the assigning of a cause, 

 and tracing out its operation, in general, when the 

 cause is known to be the true one, as well as when 

 it is only a supposed one. It is so much easier lo 

 remember any number of facts when we have in 

 this way connected them together, than it is 

 without such connexion, that these suppositions 

 are found to be of essential service to the student, 

 both in acquiring the facts in the first place, and 

 in retaining them afterwards. And beside this, we 

 may almost always, by reasoning upon our sup- 

 position, ascertain tacts, which were not known 

 before. If our supposed cause so nearly resembles 

 the true one, that known effects seem naturally to 

 arise from it we might conclude a priori that other 

 effects which would arise from the true cause, will 

 seem naturally to arise from our supposed one ; 

 and that thus, even though our supposed cause be 

 not the true one, we might, by reasoning upon it, 

 learn facts of which we should otherwise remain 

 in ignorance. And such is found to be the fact. 

 There is no truth more clearly taught, by the his- 

 tory of natural science, than that theory and hy- 

 pothesis are two of the most efficient instruments 

 which man can make use ol] in extending his 

 knowledge of nature. Much objection is often felt 

 and expressed against theoretical discussions, from 

 a misapprehension of their true character. The 

 scientific writer in advancing a theory, and tra- 

 cing out its application to the subject in hand, does 

 not intend, that it shall be received as a constitu- 

 ent part of our knowledge of nature, or that it shall 

 be placed upon a footing with the facts ofscience ; 

 but only as something which may be supposed, 

 lor the purpose of iiicihtating our acquisition of 

 knowledge, and to be used for increasing the 

 amount of that knowledge. Whether the theory 

 shall, in the end, turn out to be true or not true, so 

 long as it agrees well with known facts, it may be 

 used with great effect in extending our knowledge 

 of nature. We should always, however, remem- 

 ber, that it is nothing more than a supposition ; 

 and of course, hold ourselves in readiness to give 

 it up, the moment a more probable supposition is 

 advanced. 



I have thought it advisable to say thus much 

 on this subject, as I purpose, in the present chap- 

 ter to give the commonly received hypothesis 

 respecting the origin of theflower. I should leave 

 my examination of the flower incomplete, as well 

 as fail to give some information respecting it which 

 is curious, and of considerable practical impor- 

 tance, should I pass on without giving, at least, 



an outline sketch of this theory. Ifany one will 

 advance a more probable theory, or one, which 

 agrees better with known facts, I lor one, will give 

 up the present theory, so soon as I am satisfied 

 that such is the case. 



This iheory may be briefly stated thus: A flower, 

 and all that spiings from it, is nothing more than 

 a transformed branch, including under the term 

 branch, not only the axis or stem, but also its 

 appendages, the leaves. Thistranslormation is sup- 

 posed to take place by the abortion, degeneration, 

 or adhesion of thediflerent plants of a branch. In 

 supposing the transliarmation to be efl'ected by the 

 operation of these three several causes, we are not 

 assigning any other causes than those which we 

 see in operation every where around us. The term 

 abortion, would seem to mean, that a part soon 

 after its original formation, became deformed, and 

 ceased to have the power of further developement; 

 but such is not the sense in wliich botanists use 

 it. "By abortion, they mean, the non-appearance 

 of an organ at the place where one would expect 

 that it would appear, and where, in lijct, it would 

 be found if the structure were regular." Instances 

 of abortion in the organs of vegetables, must be 

 liimiliar to every one at all in the habit of ob- 

 serving nature. Degeneration, consists in a part 

 being less fully developed than is natural. De- 

 generation is a much more frequent source of al- 

 teration in the appearance of plants than abortion. 

 That the different parts of a plant may degenerate, 

 we have proof in the falling off' both in quality and 

 quantity ofthose which are cultivated by man, when 

 they grow in circumstances unfiivorable to their 

 full developement. The operation of this same 

 cause may often be detected, where at first 

 thought we would not suspect it. The thorns on 

 a wild crab apple-tree, are nothing but degenerate 

 branches ; that such is the fact is proved by an ex- 

 examination of their position and structure. They 

 are situated just at the points at which branches 

 would normally have appeared. They always, 

 whilst young, bear lea ves,and these leaves are situa- 

 ted with respect to each otherjust as the leaves on 

 a branch are. But the most satisliictory proof is 

 aflforded in the fact that when one of these trees is 

 removed, and placed in circumstances morefiavora- 

 ble to its growth, not another thorn will be pro- 

 duced upon it, and often its old thorns will be 

 converted into true branches. Adhesion, or the 

 growing together of parts, is a much more common 

 source of alteration, than either of the other two. 

 Of the operation of this cause we have instances 

 in the accidental growth together of two cucum- 

 bers, or of two apples, or of two or more stems 

 which have sprung up very near to each other. 

 Indeed the liftj of every graft depends upon its 

 adhesion to the stock. In assigning abortion, 

 degeneration, and adhesion as causes by which the 

 transformation of a branch is effected, it is evident 

 we are not assigning causes which are merely sup- 

 positious ones ; but such as we do, in fact, see in 

 operation around us. 



But are the changes, which it is necessary that 

 a branch should undergo, in order to be converted 

 into a flower, such as we ever see to take place 

 in plants'? In answer to this question, it might be 

 sufficient simply to mention the well-established 

 fact that any branch of a steril tree may be made 

 to produce flowers and fruit by removing a ring of 

 its bark near the point at which it is inserted in 



