107 
the family should be broken up and its genera should be referred respectively 
to the Apocynacesx, Gentianaces, Solanacess Rubiaces, and Asclepiadacem. 
The limits of the families just referred to and their members to some extent 
vary, according as we hold this view or that. 
Now, take examples of another kind. The Labiate"” and Verbenacex” 
are, according to one way of looking at them, to be regarded as two dis- 
tinct families; but in another way— which is that observed in the 
Borraginacex”, which is established regardless of the position of the styles 
(whether the latter are terminal or gynobasic) — the former two families (i.e. 
Labiatse and Verbenacese) should be united. Should the former view be held 
in the case of the Borraginacex, the latter family should be divided into two. 
But, such a division, in fact, could never be cansidered natural. The same ig 
true of the separation of the Labiats from the Verbenacex. The two families 
are only artificially or superficially separated, but in reality, they are closely 
inter-related like the meshes of a net. This shows plainly that it is impossible 
to classify plants according to one sole view so naturally that the classification 
should denote their natural relations; that the latter relations are not to be 
understood in a static sense, but are only conceivable in dynamic senses ; and 
finally, that natural groups are only thinkable in a dynamic sense. 
Now let me give other examples showing how the natural arrangement or 
natural system of such natural dynamic groups should also be a dynamic one. 
Julianiacee” (Julianiales) : This group is closely related to the Anacardiacex 
and Juglandaces (the latter two families are widely separated from each 
other, so far as the existing system is concerned) in its resiniferous character, 
in its unisexual flowers with reduced envelopes, and in its solitary exalbuminate 
seeds. Other points of resemblance or similarity between the Julianiacez and the : 
Juglandacez are the dissimilar male and female flowers, the broad stigmatic lobes 
of the styles and single coated ovules. In anatomical characters, the Julianiacese 
and Anacardiaces are very much alike, and the singular funicular development of 
the ovules, the seeds and embryo, are very much the same in both families. 
1) Nat. Pfi-fam. IV.—3, a, p. 205. 2) Nat. Pfl-fam. IV.—3, a, 143. 
3) Nat. Pfl-fam. IV.—3, a, p. 80. 4) Hemstzy, W. B.— On the Julianiacee: A New 
Natural Order of Plants, in Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. Series B, CXCIX. pp. 169-197, Plates 18 -24. 
