90 Keith's 'Botanical Lexicon, 



As a systematic botanist, he ranges himself on the sideof Jus- 

 sieu ; though not without pronouncing the most respectful eulogy 

 on Linnaeus, and some of his predecessors. Nor does he pay 

 an implicit preference, nor give an unqualified commendation, 

 of the natural system, without comment. He criticises some of 

 its expounders, as wandering from the simplicity in which its 

 author studied, and the best of his commentators study, to ex- 

 hibit it • on which point he expresses himself thus : — 



" If we were called upon to say how it is at all practicable to adapt the sys- 

 tem of Jussieu to the present state of botanical knowledge, without innovating 

 upon its principles, in external appearance at least, our reply would be, that, 

 availing ourselves of whatever we may find in the works of the above-men- 

 tioned authors [De Candolle and Lindley] or of others, calculated to illustrate 

 the character of the groups, or to give perspicuity to the arrangements, of 

 Jussieu, and retaining not merely the foundation, but the identical structure 

 which he reared upon it, we would venture to add to it a trifle more of exten- 

 sion, or of fiUing up, in the style and manner, as much as may be, of the original 

 edifice, that the masterly traits of the hand of the fonnder may never be lost 

 sight of. It will be seen that this adaptation can descend no lower than to the 

 distribution of classes. The orders and their arrangement will be continually 

 chan"ing, as long as there shall remain new plants to be collected, or new 

 affinities to be discovered ; but we do not see the necessity of any violent alter- 

 ation in the circumscribing of the larger groups. AH that we regard as neces- 

 sary is comprised in the following tabular sketch, giving, as we fancy, a neatness 

 of outline to the higher divisions of the system, by the formal introduction of 

 a very few distinctions, that were either implied in it from the beginning, or 

 rendered necessary by the progress of analytical research. 



Vegetables. 

 Group I. Cotyledonous Plants. Vascular, with spiral tubes ; phsenoga- 

 mous, bisexual, angiospermous. 

 Divis. I. Dicotyledons. Growth exogenous, circumferential. 



Subdiv. I. Dichlamydeae. Floral envelope double, a calyx and corolla. 

 Sect. 1. Polypetalous, containing three classes, viz.: 1. Hypopetalas ; 



2. Peripetalae; and, 3. Epipetalae. 

 Sect. 2. Monopetaloiis, containing three classes ; viz. : 4. Hypocorollge ; 

 5. Pericorollae ; 6 . EpicoroUae ; to which are attached, first, Synan- 

 therae, and, secondly, Corisantherae. 

 Subdiv. II. Monoclilamydece . Floral envelope single ; perianth or presumed 

 calyx. 

 Sect. 1. Apetalous, containing three classes ; viz.: 7. Hypostamineae ; 



8. Peristamineae; and, 9. Epistamineae. 

 Sect. 2. Anomalous. Class 10. Diclines, of which one subsect, is 

 Angiospermse, and another Gymnospermous. 

 Divis. II. Monocotyledons. Growth endogenous, central. Floral envelope 

 a perianth, often in two rows ; sepaloid, petaloid, or glumaceous. 

 Class 11. Monohypogyuce ; 12. JVIonoperigynae ; and, 13. Monoepigynse. 

 Group II. Acotyledonous Plants. Cellular, or, if vascular, without spiral 

 tubes ; cryptogamous. 

 Class 14. Ductulosae. Cellular, with interspersed ducts ; seminiferous. 

 Class 15. Eductulosa;. Wholly cellular ; gemmiferous. 

 Thus, the whole of the vegetable kingdom is divided into two grand groups, 

 without any sacrifice of the technical language of Jussieu." 



Whatever may be the merit of this scheme of systematic ar- 

 rangement, it has one recommendation, and that is conciseness ; 

 although aware that it is the opinion of many able botanists that 



