n. UNCERTAINTY OF SPECIES. 37 



With a disclaimer of any -wish to give just cause for 

 offence, and a denial of the right in any one to take 

 offence because his published doings are subjected to 

 published comment, recourse shall here be had to a very 

 recent example of species-making, in illustration of the 

 practice objected against. Comparing the third and 

 fourth editions of the ' Manual of British Botany ' (1851 

 and 185G), we find in the latter a novel species oi Ranun- 

 culus or Batrachium, described under the name of jR. flo- 

 rihundus (Bab.), and a novel species of Arctium under 

 name oi A.iyuhens (Bab.) Let it be assumed or admitted 

 as a fact, that since the date of the third edition of the 

 Manual, published in 185.1, its Author has discovered 

 some clear characters by which individual plants of these 

 two alleged species can be recognized as of the same spe- 

 cies, and by which they can also be satisfactorily dis- 

 tinguished from all other species. 



Now, may it not reasonably be inquired, in respect of 

 these alleged species, — How many generations have been 

 seen by Mr. Babington or any other botanist, known to 

 have descended from seeds of the same individual plant 

 or plants ? — Whether they have regularly reproduced 

 their own likeness for any considerable number of gene- 

 rations ? — Whether any varieties have been looked for 

 and found, or raised from seeds ? — And if so, whether 

 these varieties have again been converted into the origi- 

 nal types, by reproduction or otherwise ? If the " inven- 

 tor " (the Pteviewer's term) of those species cannot answer 

 these questions, in such manner as to show that the 

 plants are true species, it must be clear that he does not 

 know i\\e Ranunculus jiorihundus and Arctium pubens to 

 be true species ; and that he only guesses them to be so 

 on some analogy, actual or imaginary, with other sup- 

 posed si^ecies. In short, observing that certain indivi- 



