TRANSACTIONS OF THE SECTIONS. 103 
stances on the leaves of Drosera and Pinguicula, and which, as Dr. Burdon 
Sanderson has remarked, prove in the case of Dionca that this plant digests exactly 
the same substances, and in exactly the same way, that the human stomach does *. 
With these researches Mr. Darwin is still actively engaged; and it has been with 
the view of rendering him such aid as my position and opportunities at Kew 
worn me, that 1 have, under his instructions, examined some other carnivorous 
plants. 
In the course of my inquiries I have been led to look into the early history of 
the whole subject, which I find to be so little known and so interesting that I have 
thought that a sketch of it, up to the date of Mr. Darwin’s investigations, might 
ae acceptable to the members of this Association. In drawing it up, I have 
een obliged to limit myself to the most important plants; and with regard to such 
of these as Mr. Darwin has studied, I leave it to him to announce the discoveries 
which, with his usual frankness, he has communicated to me and to other friends ; 
whilst with regard to those which I have myself studied (Sarracenia and Nepenthes) 
I shall briefly detail such of my observations and experiments as seem to be the 
most suggestive. 
Dionma. 
‘About 1768 Ellis, a well-known English naturalist, sent to Linneous a drawing 
of a plant, to which he gave the poetical name of Dionea., “In the year 1765,” he 
writes, “our late worthy friend, Mr. Peter Collinson, sent me a dried specimen of 
this curious plant, which he had received from Mr. John Bartram, of Philadelphia, 
botanist to the late King”. Ellis flowered the plant in his chambers, having 
obtained living specimens from America. I will read the account which he gave 
of it to Linnwus, and which moved the great naturalist to declare that, though he 
had seen and examined no small number of plants, he had never met with so 
- wonderful a phenomenon f{ :— 
“The plant, of which I now enclose you an exact figure with a specimen of its 
leaves and blossoms, shows that Nature may have some views towards. its nourish- 
ment, in forming the upper joint of its leaf like a machine to catch food: upon the 
middle of this lies the bait for the unhappy insect that becomes its prey. Many 
minute red glands that cover its surface, and which perhaps discharge sweet liquor, 
tempt the poor animal to taste them ; and the instant these tender parts are irritated 
by its feet, the two lobes rise up, grasp it fast, lock the rows of spines together, and 
squeeze it to death. And further, lest the strong efforts for life in the creature just 
taken should serve to disengage it, three small erect spines are fixed near the middle 
of each lobe, among the glands, that effectually put an end to all its struggles. Nor 
do the lobes ever open again, while the dead animal continues there. But it is 
nevertheless certain, that the plant cannot distinguish an animal from a vegetable 
or mineral substance; for if we introduce a straw or pin between the lobes, it will 
grasp it full as fast as if it was an insect ’§. 
This account, which in its way is searcely less horrible than the descriptions of 
those medizval statues which opened to embrace and stab their victims, is sub- 
stantially correct, but erroneous in some particulars. I prefer, however, to trace 
out our knowledge of the facts in historical order, because it is extremely important 
to realize in so doing how much our appreciation of tolerably simple matters may 
be influenced by the prepossessions that occupy our mind. 
We have a striking illustration of this in-the statement published by Linnzeus a 
few years afterwards. All the facts which I have detailed to you were in his 
ossession; yet he was evidently unable to bring himself to believe that Nature 
intended the plant (to use Ellis’s words) “ to receive some nowrishment from the 
animals it selzes;” and he accordingly declared that as soon as the insects ceased 
to struggle, the leaf opened and let them go||. He only saw in these wonderful 
actions an extreme case of sensitiveness in the leaves, which caused them to fold up 
* ‘Nature,’ June 11, 1874, p. 107. 
+ A Botanical Description of the Dionea muscipula,...,.in a letter to Sir Charles 
Linneus, p. 38. 
+ Smith’s ‘ Correspondence of Linnzus,’ vol. i. p. 235. § Ellis, 7. c. p. 37. 
| “ Usque dum lassum quiescat, tumque dimittunt.”—Mantissa altera (1771), p. 238. 
