330 REVIEWS. 
mountains are as completely deciduous as in Europe.” Our no- 
tice of the very agreeable account of the Botany of these in- 
teresting islands has occupied so much of our limited space as to 
compel us to pass by Dr. Meisner’s learned paper on the Chame- 
-lauciee ; we commend it however to the notice of our readers, 
and hope they will be as well pleased with it, if they read it, as 
we have been with the remarks on the Botany of Madeira and 
Teneriffe. 
We wish to point out to the rédacteurs of these proceedings a 
slight obscurity, ambiguity, or linguistic or grammatical blemish, 
it may be, in their notice of Professor Bentley’s abnormal speci- 
mens of Larix europea, Tanacetum vulgare, and Papaver bractea- 
tum :— The Professor presented a cluster of flowers of the Ta- 
nacetum vulgare, in which some of the plants had acquired an ab- © 
normal development, apparently from the attack of insects.” The 
grammatical as well as logical antecedent to the relative which is 
flowers, not Tanacetum vulgare ; the latter is but accessory to, or 
a qualifying epithet of flowers. In plain English, the expression 
properly construed means “ Tansy flowers,” in which flowers (un- 
derstood as the subject to the relative which) “some of the plants 
had acquired an abnormal,” etc. ; that is, some of the plants had 
grown 7m or on the fiowers. Is this what the relators mean? We 
do not know. Flowers usually grow on plants, é.e. it is their 
normal position to grow uppermost. But as these Tansies were 
abnormal productions, did the plants grow on the flowers? We 
have seen rudimentary plants growing among the flowers com- 
posing a head of white clover, and we have seen white shoots from 
the ovary of a dog-rose ; and we do not say that the Tansy ex- 
hibited at the Linnzan Society’s meeting as above was not a plant 
or a series of plants produced from the flowers. On p. vi. we are 
informed that a note on a Fungus foind in the Fens of Cam- 
bridgeshire was read by the Rev. M. J. Berkeley, F.L.S. It 
would puzzle an CXdipus to tell if the reading was by the Rey. 
gentleman, or the note written, or the fungus discovered by him. 
Probably he found the curiosity, wrote the note, and read it to 
the members of the Society. We are told to look at ‘ Botanical 
Proceedings,’ p. 52, for the contents, ete. We cannot find p. 52 ; 
it is to be reckoned among the future and forthcoming pages. 
Mr. Bentham’s paper on Loganiacee is stated to be im or on 
p- 53. We hope the pleasure of reading these pages is also in the 
