.556 THE GENESIS OF NEW FORMS AS A RESULT OF CROSSING. 



layers) as well as by budding and grafting (see vol. i. p. 213); but the first origin 

 of the new forms is always to be traced to crossing. This statement applies also to 

 many other plants of which gardeners have taken possession, and especially to cases 

 where propagation by seed requires more time and trouble than multiplication of 

 brood-bodies. The kinds of Tulip, Gladiolus, and Lily produced by crossing are 

 propagated most easily by means of bulbs, and the tuberous Begonias, Dahlias, and 

 Gesneraceas by tubers, whilst Pinks, Pelargoniums, Cactuses, and many others are 

 most rapidly reproduced by cuttings. Moreover, these methods ensure the preser- 

 vation of the peculiarities of the new forms unchanged, and such perpetuation of 

 characteristics would be much more difficult to achieve if the plants were propa- 

 gated by means of seeds. On the other hand, a number of new forms which have 

 originated as the results of crosses effected in gardens, such as those of Petunia, 

 Portulaca, and Viola, are reproduced with less trouble and greater rapidity by 

 seeds, and that method is in such cases preferred to the cultivation of brood-bodies. 

 The statement that new forms of plants are bred originally in gardens by any 

 ■other method than that of crossing is incorrect; it is sometimes made in ignorance, 

 but sometimes also with the intention of deceiving. In former times gardeners 

 believed that, in order to produce new forms, it was sufficient to plant different 

 species in close proximity to one another. The idea was that if the seeds of such 

 plants were taken and sown in good soil, there would always be found amongst the 

 seedlings a few forms differing from the parent; these were to be selected for 

 especial care in cultivation, and were to be treated as starting-points of new forms. 

 The gardeners who acted on this assumption had not, it is true, themselves crossed 

 the flowers; and if this was all they meant, there was no falsehood in the state- 

 ment. The operation of crossing was, however, performed without their knowledge 

 by hive- and humble-bees and other insects, and the planting together of the 

 •different species was only of advantage inasmuch as it facilitated the conveyance 

 of pollen from one species to the stigmas of another. A celebrated grower of the 

 old school once assured me, in all seriousness, that he did not himself cross the 

 plants he reared, but that he had repeatedly observed that early in the morning, 

 soon after a flower opened, it put forth infinitesimally flne threads which radiated 

 in all directions and reached across to the flowers of other plants, forming in a short 

 time a web like that of a spider! I would not have mentioned this statement were 

 it not for the importance of pointing out the unreliable character of so many of the 

 statements made by gardeners, especially in the past; and I repeat that the person 

 responsible for the above communication is a well-known and much-esteemed horti- 

 culturalist. Gross inventions such as the above would, of course, be at once seen 

 through and rejected by any thoughtful man; nevertheless, in some instances, 

 reports of growers, likewise untrue or inaccurate, but not bearing the stamp of 

 improbability so plainly upon the face of them, have been credited and have even 

 found their way into books, particularly into those whose authors have omitted to 

 confirm the reports by watching the garden-experiments from beginning to end 

 themselves. The statements are then not infrequently quoted as "results obtained 



