106 
other, the potent a gene. There are more three different ways of making up. 
such groups of the same category by substituting (b) (e) or (d), in the place 
of (a), Also, there are certainly many other ways of grouping the four 
Species so as to classify the species by taking a combination of genes as| a 
criterion instead of a single gene, such as ab, cb, ac, be, ed, or bed, 
acd, abd, abe, and so forth,—each way being in agreement with a 
natural relation according to each respective view. So the groups themselves 
are changeable or dynamic, according to whether we take this gene or that, 
or this combination or that, as a criterion for classification. One way of 
grouping can not be said to be more natural than others. Any one is 
natural so far as it is understood as dynamic and changeable according to 
views. But as soon as it is understood to be the only fixed, unchangeable 
one, admitting no other way, it becomes unnatural. I shall give a few 
examples of an actual instance, just below. 
Velloziacese? (Liliiflore): This family is referable to the Amaryllidaces 
according to one view, but it may be included in the Hzemodoracex according to 
another view. Moreover, it will prove to be a distinct family, if viewed from 
a different standpoint. So the family itself is a dynamic one, variously 
grouped according to the way of looking at the matter. 
Myoporacese” (Tubifloree): According to one view, this family should be 
divided into two, namely : — one, containing Myoporum, Pholidia, Bontia and 
Zombiana, which might be incorporated into the Scrophulariacese, — the other, 
_ represented by Oftia, which might be referred to the Verbenaces. Should this 
view be kept, then the Myoporacex must be disorganized and the limits and the 
members of the Serophulariacese and Verbenaceew should to some extent be 
altered. Truly, the plants referable to the above three families share their 
genes so as to be grouped in several ways according to views just as we 
have seen in the four symbolized species to which we have referred before. 
One way of grouping can not be said to be more natural than the others. 
Loganiacese” (Contortee): This group is regarded according to one view as 
a distinct family ; but according to another view, as is proposed by BalLion, 
1) Nat. Pi.-fam. IL—5, p. 125. 2) Nat. Pil-fom. IV.—3, b. p. 357. 
3) Nat. Pfl.-fam. IV.-2, p. 26. 
