GfJUNIAl 



BALSAMINA( I 





innermost lobed t»<. pah 



that of Bernhardt, who regards the exfc 



parte, of which three only, namely fhe spur and the I 

 an | n w nt, and the others rudimentary or missing ; whi 

 five parte, ol which the four lower are una.. I in pairs into the I 



and the fifth is either separate, as in Hydroc. 

 back united sepals into what he calls a petal-sepal A fourth « 

 who considers the large back the flower to tx composed ol tw« 



ether with the spur and exterioi rm a five-leaved calyx; wl 



m the two innermost parte a corolla of four petals united in | 

 fifth petal to be abortive. This opinion has been adopted bj Arnott in I 

 Preal in 1836, the latter having discovered the fifth or missing petal to be | 

 tally in the garden Balsam, and always in Hydro© ra triflora : both thi - 

 finding in the genus Hydrocera the back piece, which is ample in Imj 

 ol two parte, and therefore confirming the accuracy of the theory of Kunth <>• 



opinions, '•'■ '"' less resembling these, bavi been formed by others, but it is dear that 



Kunth's theory i- the only one that is correct 



If we make a section horizontally through a young flower-bud of [mpat 

 ehila, we find the following structure :— There is in the centre an ovary of fivi 

 with these alternate the five Btamens, of which the fifth or anterior hasaloi 



,ha " '' l! " ■'"- : so far the structure i- n gular, and we have all tl 



d the flower, however irregular, being formed upon a quinary type. I 



the Btamens Btand the two i armosi pii ces ; these cannot be simple, • 



opposite the intermediate Btamens ; but their two-lobed figure, when I 

 that each i- double, and then, their apparent centre being in fad their united mai 

 j alternate with the anterior Btamens, and bo tail into the place usually 

 Js Hie last mentioned parte are half enveloped by the back piece, which i. ;ht 



■ its position, be the fifth petal ; but the case of Hydrocera Knowing it really to con- 

 ol two united parte, theymust be opposite the stamens,and consequently 



ues the spur, which overlaps the back piece, and stands opposite the ante] 

 ten ; as no tendency to divide on the part of thi- pit a is ev. r found, it must be a 

 a!. Finally, the external scales, placed right and left of the whole flower, a 

 with those parts already shown to be Bepals, and consequently are i 



the calyx required to complete the quinary plan of the whole flower. It will 

 remarked, that a fifth petal has not been found ; if the eye is turned upon tl I 

 piece, already found to be composed of two Bepals, it will be seen that a part is i 

 ween those two and the two corresponding Btamens ; and this is the place wl 

 rbon ol a fifth ol the corolla may, upon the evidence of this flower, 1 

 ir, and where it is proved to take place by the evidence ol Bydrocera, in which I 

 missing in the Balsam makes it- appearance. 

 The annexed diagram will serve u> 

 rate the |>rec< ding observations; 

 the parts of the flower, as they really 

 exist in Impatiens being projected 

 upon a plane consisting ol five circles, 

 of which the exterior (S) repr 

 ill" sepals or calyx, the next P) the 

 - or corolla, the third ( - 1 the 



■ ns, the fourth {c) the carpels, 

 and the central (p) the placenta, or 

 ■i\i>. 



onected with these plant- i- a 

 point of structure deserving ol atten- 

 me species it will !„■ 

 roond that the style is surrounded 

 below its apex by five points, which 

 ntlv continuations of the 

 backs of the five carpellary leaves, 

 which certainly in these plant- are 

 ■eparate from the placenta, and are 

 ni.T<l\ pn ssed down upon it - 

 i" cover the ovules, thus confirming 

 toe accuracy of the views concerning 

 waeentation held by Schykofsky and 

 N-hlei.l,,!. It' so, „ha< else can the 

 upper pan of the style an, I the stigmas 



