1857.] REVIEWS. 137 



tellect. He was perfectly astounded to learn that tlie present 

 audacious generation of botanists ignored Linn?eus, and Wither- 

 ing, and Smith, and followed Jussieu, De CandoUe, Endlicher, 

 Lindley, Fries, and a host of minor stars, [quas] quos nunc pra- 

 scribere longum est. If any of our readers are aware that there 

 are two distinct works on botany, by two independent authors, 

 arranged exactly after the same system or in the same order, 

 we do not know this fact, and should esteem it a favour to have 

 the same pointed out to us. De CandoUe's system ends where 

 Jussieu's begins. Both these eminent systematists have adopted 

 diflPerent nomenclatures and differing diagnoses, as well as differ- 

 ing arrangements. Dr. Lindley has given each of them a turn ; 

 but on the whole this eminent system-maker sticks to Jussieu. 

 Fries and Endlicher have had no followers in Britain : De Can- 

 dolle and Jussieu bear the palm among us. Our first British 

 Flora on the natural system is on De CandoUe's, modified to 

 adapt it to our plants. Dr. Macreight's ' Manual,' Mr. Babing- 

 ton's "^ Manual,' Hooker and Arnott's ' British Flora,' etc. etc., all 

 differ more or less from each other; and subsequent editions 

 of the same work differ from earlier ones, etc. etc. This, as has 

 been already stated, may be of small moment to a beginner, to 

 whom all systems are equally unknown, but it is a trouble to 

 veterans who have had to learn and unlearn many previous modes 

 of arrangement. 



Hoping the readers of the ' Phytologist ' will excuse this di- 

 gression from our legitimate subject, nous reviendrons a nos mou- 

 tons. Mr. Childs di^ddes the British Plants into Exogens and 

 Endogens. He omits the Ferns and Fern-allies, usually com- 

 prehended in similar works. The Exogens he divides into Her- 

 maphrodite and Diclinous Exogens. The former term might 

 have been dispensed with, because it is not entirely unexcep- 

 tionable, and the terms complete or perfect are equally expres- 

 sive : besides, the contrast would have been more intelligible to 

 tyros if the nomenclature stood thus — " Perfect or complete Ex- 

 ogens," and " Imperfect or incomplete Exogens." Thus one dis- 

 agreeable word, as well as a difficult one, might have been spared. 

 The complete-flowered Exogens are subdivided into Hypogynous 

 (ovary superior), Perigynous (ovary attached), and Epigynous 

 (ovary inferior) species. He omits the subdivisions Polypetal(B 

 and Monopetalce. Dichlamydece and Monochlamydece are also 



N. S. VOL. II. T 



