338 



PHILOSOPHICAL NOTES ON 



Fig. 143. Fingered Citron much 

 reduced (" Or. and Lem. of India,*' 

 pi. 139, Fig. a\ 



Fig. 144, Section of Fingered 

 Citron, almost natural size (" Or. 

 and Lem. of India," pi. 139, Fig. c). 



that (Up ]){irts of a fruit are subject to dis[)laeeinent. 

 Exactly ; but if the outer surface of a car})el is subject 

 to displacement with regard to its inner surface, it can 

 liardly be maintained that the two surfaces belong to 

 one carpel. Hypothesis (a) would then be no longer 

 tenable. 



It niight, however, be said that the peel is, in many 

 varieties of Citnis, so closely adherent to the pulp- 

 carpels that they cannot be considered as two distinct 

 things. This argument, it will be seen, is two-edged. 

 In the Citrus the puljj-carpels are easily separable one 

 from the other, and so anybody can see that they are all 

 distinct parts ; but in the (E(/le marmelos they are as 

 closely bound together by intervening parenchyma as 

 the pulp-carpels of many Citrus are bound to their peel. 

 Therefore^ this same argument might be used to show 

 that the pulp-carpels of the (Egle marmelos are 7iot 

 distinct things ! 

 (/.) Then we have the evidence produced l)y two Citrus 

 ovaries fusing into one fruit, such as tho.se shown in 

 pis. 223 and 224 of " Or. and Lem. of India." If the 

 peel be a part of the pulp-carj)els, aiul not a separate 

 envelope, why does it in such cases behave exactlv like 

 the fused corollas of the hyacinth when thev enclose 

 two ovaries? By the fusion of the two corallas a 

 common envelope is made for the two ovaries. The 



