218 VEGETABLE ORGANOGRAPHY. 



regarding the nutrition. If the identity of nature of 

 these germs, developed with and without fecundation, 

 could be completely demonstrated, it would be a power- 

 ful argument against the system of Epigenesis. I must 

 explain myself: — among the naturalists who have studied 

 the theory of animal generation, there are formed two 

 opposite classes : — some, -such as Haller, Bonnet, and 

 Spallanzani, maintain that the germ exists perfectly 

 formed, before fecundation, in the female organ, and 

 only receives from the male organ its vital action. The 

 others, as Needham, &c, have thought that the germ 

 exists in the male organ, which transmits it to the 

 female, which only serves as a matrix for it. The recent 

 observations of Prevost and Dumas seem to give force to 

 this last opinion, although, in fact, all that is known can 

 be explained in both theories. When we wish to apply 

 these considerations to the vegetable kingdom, we are 

 asked if the little granules, which are perceived in some 

 fovillas, do not enjoy an analogous function to what is 

 attributed to the spermatic animalculas ; but notwith- 

 standing the numberless facts which prove the existence 

 of the ovules before fecundation, and the continuity of 

 the embryo with the mother-plant, it is evident that if 

 the unfecundated germs are developed in the same 

 manner as fecundated ovules, we must conclude that 

 they are produced by the female organ, and only owe 

 their vital action to the male. 



The reproduction of plants by simple division, or, 

 which is to say the same thing, by unfecundated germs, 

 is an universal phenomenon, and all plants appear 

 capable of this mode of multiplication. Vegetable 

 fecundation, some philosophers have said, is a useless 

 phenomenon, since all plants have another mode of 

 reproduction, and consequently, we ought not to admit 

 it. ¥c may respond to this kind of argument : — 1st, 



