Botany and Zoology. 125 
how to describe them in botanical language. No one would have 
thought that so much thoroughly correct botany could have been so sim- 
ply and happily taught in so small a volume. A. G. 
adicle-ism.—That the stem or ascending axis in Pheenogamous 
and the higher Cryptogamous plants is composed of a series of similar 
parts, viz: of nodes or leaf-bearing points separated by internodes, each 
internode developed frem the summit or node of its predecessor, is the 
fundamental doctrine in structural botany. That the embryo (with on 
developed plumule) is simply the initial term of the series; that its so- 
called radicle is not root, but answers to internode, just as the cotyledons 
s to 
although likely to succeed in the end, make slow progress. Some of these 
endeavors, or protests, are recorded iu this Journal, e. gr., in the nos. for 
Nov., 1857, p. 435; in Nov. 1858, p. 416; in July, 1961, p. 126; in 
Sept., 1863, p. 201; and finally in Nov., 1863, p. 435. In the article 
last referred to, we noted what we took for an admission decisive of the 
question, viz: that “the radicle is rightly regarded as an axis and not a 
root.” 1e word ‘axis,’ as here used in contradistinetion to ‘root,’ we 
understood to mean ascending axis or stem. e were hasty, it appears ; 
and our mistake arose from our not considering a third possible alterna- 
tive, ie. that the radicle might be neither root nor stem, but a fertium 
; quid. This very view is now propounded by Prof. Oliver, in the Natural 
3 History Review for April last (p. 314), in an article which, replying as 
it does to our criticism, may be presumed to express the opinion of Dr. 
ooker also, Propounded by such authorities, the view is entitled to 
oud at we sup be the accepted view, we have 
the plant built up by the successive repetition of homologous parts, of 
; d joints of stem, each bearing a leaf or leaves at its su 
! extremity, and each capable of sending out a root or roots, actually pro- 
: ‘aly at the u . a i the lower, therefore the 
aw pper end of the radicle, none at : é 
_ Mdicle cannot be an internode! This is literally true. The series of 
“odes and internodes—not being infinite, nor in a circle like the old 
--Feyptian symbol of a serpent with its tail in its mouth—must needs 
