Chap. XIV.] CLASSIFICATION. 209 



found that a classification founded on any single 

 character, however important that may be, has always 

 failed; for no part of the organisation is invariably 

 constant. The importance of an aggregate of characters, 

 even when none are important, alone explains the 

 aphorism enunciated by Linnaeus, namely, that the 

 characters do not give the genus, but the genus gives 

 the characters ; for this seems founded on the apprecia- 

 tion of many trifling points of resemblance, too slight to 

 be defined. Certain plants, belonging to the Malpighi- 

 aceae, bear perfect and degraded flowers ; in the latter, 

 as A. de Jussieu has remarked, " the greater number of 

 the characters proper to the species, to the genus, to the 

 family, to the class, disappear, and thus laugh at our 

 classification." When Aspicarpa produced in France, 

 during several years, only these degraded flowers, 

 departing so wonderfully in a number of the most 

 important points of structure from the proper type of 

 the order, yet M. Eichard sagaciously saw, as Jussieu 

 observes, that this genus should still be retained 

 amongst the Malpighiacese. This case well illustrates 

 the spirit of our classifications. 



Practically, when naturalists are at work, they do 

 not trouble themselves about the physiological value 

 of the characters which they use in defining a group 

 or in allocating any particular species. If they find 

 a character nearly uniform, and common to a great 

 number of forms, and not common to others, they use it 

 as one of high value ; if common to some lesser number, 

 they use it as of subordinate value. This principle has 

 been broadly confessed by some naturalists to be the 

 true one; and by none more clearly than by that 

 excellent botanist, Aug. St. Hilaire. If several trifling 



