Cross- versus Self-fertilisation 
assumption that cross - fertilisation is advan- 
tageous to plants. It is questionable whether 
this assumption is justified. True it is that 
numbers of experiments have been performed, 
which show that, in many cases, flowers which are 
artificially self-fertilised yield comparatively few 
seeds. But experiments of this kind do not 
prove very much. 
To place on the stigma pollen from the anthers 
of the same flower, in case of a plant which for 
many generations has been cross-fertilised, is to 
subject the plant in question to a novel experi- 
ence—an experience which may be compared to 
transplanting it to another soil. The immediate 
effect may appear to be unfavourable, although, 
if the experiment be persisted in, the ultimate 
results may prove beneficial to the plant. 
That this is the case with some flowers that 
are artificially fertilised is asserted by the Rev. 
G. Henslow. This observer states, that had 
Darwin pursued his investigations further, he 
would probably have modified his views regard- 
ing the benefits of self-fertilisation. Darwin's 
statement that “ Nature abhors perpetual self- 
fertilisation” seems to be as far from the 
truth as that which declares “ Nature abhors a 
vacuum.” 
From the mere fact that cross-fertilised flowers 
yield a greater quantity of seed than they do 
when self-fertilised, it does not necessarily follow 
259 
