1897] EDITORIALS 379 
the suggestion originally made in the review.) Such groping after the 
shadowy phyton is not only hopeless but useless. If, potentially, every 
node and internode of a plant is an individual, for the reason which 
Professor Bailey assigns, so is every fragment which contains a grow- 
ing point or is capable of forming one when injured. How large the 
“individual” will be depends solely upon the necessities of nutrition. 
What a curious sort of éxdiv7sibility this is! 
The attempt to find a.unit of individuality in the phyton has 
utterly failed, and the whole fancy may well be abandoned. We shall 
then be rid of at least one technical term which is no longer needed to 
express an idea. Professor Bailey’s well grounded point as to the 
overmastering influence of external conditions upon the form of 
members can be quite as adequately expressed in terms of modern 
anatomy. 
