80 REVIEWS — OUTIilNES OF ELEMENTARY BOTANY. 



to correct what is wrong in " old established " ideas and expressions, 

 and in pcieucc we are sure that accuracy of expression is essential for 

 the diirusion of clear and correct ideas, so that if even great authori- 

 ties are found resisting needful improvements, the movement belongs 

 to those who insist on their importance. Gamopefalous is, after all, 

 an awkward figurative term ; but to Synpetalous and Synsepalous, 

 there can be no reasonable objection, and apopetalous or dialypetalous 

 will serve for the contrasted term. If being established is a good 

 excuse for retaining a term, invented when the true nature of the case 

 was not understood, and expressing a false view, we see no chance for 

 improvement. 



Again, we cannot help objecting very strongly to the use of Pistil, 

 as a collective name for the carpels which make up the inner circle 

 of the flower : GyncBcium we think the most appropriate term. 

 A pistil, according to Linnaean ideas, is an apparently distinct part 

 of the gynoecium, being either one of the carpels of an apocarpous 

 gyncecium ; one style and stigma where the ovarian portions of the 

 carpels cohere, or the seemingly single organ formed by the complete 

 coherence of the carpels.* With our present views of structure, such 

 a term is useless except in applying the Linnaean System, and ought 

 no longer to be employed in descriptive botany. The inner circle of 

 the parts of a flower is the gynoecium, its several parts or the several 

 modified leaves of which it consists are carpels, and each carpel 

 consists of ovary, style, and stigma. We cannot accept, judging from 

 our own experience and reading, Mr. Bentham's statement that pistil 

 is generally applied in a collective sense, and we believe it to be now 

 generally used in a very vague manner, which needs correction ; this 

 is easily applied by using pistil only in its Linnaean sense, and having 

 good names both for the whole circle, the several pieces of which it is 

 composed, and the distinguishable parts of each. 



We note minor objections because so few occur to us, and we so 



very much admire and value the work, which we in coiiclusion most 



warmly recommend to all who are engaged in botanical studies. 



W. H. 



* Observing that the Linuaean use of the term pistil has been a subject of controversy, 

 ■we turned to the Philosophia Botanica and carefully re-exaunined every sentence in which 

 the word occurs. The result is a confirmed conviction that Linnaeus could not possibly 

 have intended pistil as a general name for the inner circle of a flower. He speaks of pistils 

 as one or more. The theory of the carpels not having been yet thought of, an entire or 

 almost entire union of styles and stigmas was to him one pistil, whilst any considerable 

 separation of styles, with or without coherence below, was regarded by him as several 

 pistils. His authority cannot be used in favour of Mr. Bentham's application of the term, 

 which is otherwise very objectionable. 



