re AE ars 
Botany and Zoology. 491 
ass? It is conceived on both sides that flowers were “ primordi- 
ally inconspicuous.” (To this Henslow adds hermaphrodite and 
self-fertile, but that need not here come — account na Both 
(ex 
=] 
a 
and not by benefiting but by iste the flowers. | “These 
in its development ; a uch a flower is very generally 
proterandrous.” Mr. Darwin might accept this as an ingenious 
es 
thing would hardly come to pass,” as the poet has it. And Mr. 
Henslow’s hypothesis has to be supplemented to account for 
proterogyny, which is not much less es But Henslow’s 
supposed pecewe works evil instead of good, and is therefore 
thi 
accordingly, the cross-fertilization which comes into play in the 
case of separated sexes, and in that of self-sterile herman enon ie 
is pot for any good there is in it per se, but because it may n 
e dam 
their persistent visits ! Mr. Henslow ever ask himself the 
question why the sexes are separate in animals ? 
The conclusion which Mr. Darwin had helped us to reach is, 
that ———- should be regarded as the aim in nature and on 
the whole most beneficial, and self-fertilization as a safe-guard 
against the ie of crossin ; that most hermaphrodite flowers. 
former for ultimate benefit. he new view, self-fertiliza- 
tion is the ai nd the — , and cross-fertilization at 
best a ee B ts may repair the damage they 
