428 JOURNAL OF SCIENCE. 
now beginning to clear up. Hooker says (p. xxxviii.):—‘ Under 
whatever aspect I regard the Flora of Australia and New Zealand, I 
find all attempts to theorize on the possible causes of their community 
of feature frustrated by anomalies in distribution such as I believe no 
two other similarly situated countries in the globe present. Every- 
whore else I recognize a parallelism or harmony in the main common 
features of contiguous Floras, which conveys the impression of their 
generic affinity at least being effected by migration from centres of 
dispersion in one of them, or in some adjacent country. In this case 
it is widely different. Regarding the question from the Australian 
point of view, it is impossible in the present state of science to 
reconcile the fact of Acacia, Eucalyptus, Casuarina, Callitris, &e., 
being absent in New Zealand, with any theory of transoceanic 
migration that may be adopted to explain the presence of other 
Australian plants in New Zealand; and it is very difficult to conceive 
of a time or of conditions that could explain these anomalies, except 
by going back to epochs when the prevalent botanical as well as 
geographical features of each were widely different from what they 
are now. On the other hand, if I regard the question from the New 
Zealand point of view, I find such broad features of resemblance, and 
so many connecting links that afford irresistible evidence of a close 
botanical connection that I cannot abandon the conviction that these 
creat differences will present the least difficulties to whatever theory 
may explain the whole case.” 
But the important works to which such detailed reference has 
been made represent only a tithe of the botanical labours in which 
Hooker was engaged during these years. Volume XXII. of the 
Linnean Society’s Transactions contains several important contribu- | 
tions. The first paper is a monograph of the remarkable order of 
root-parasites—Balanophoresze—in which the structure and affinities of 
all the known species are detailed, and a systematic statement of all 
is given. In the last paper of the same volume is an analysis of a 
new genus—Dactylanthus—specimens of which he had received from 
New Zealand from the Rev. W. Taylor. Considering the imperfect 
condition of his materials, the results arrived at were excellent, but 
it would be very advisable for local botanists to work out the life- 
history and structure from fresh specimens. He says of this singular 
plant—“‘The most remarkable character of Dactylanthus is its 
inflorescence, which, instead of presenting the solitary capitulum or 
spadix of most of its allies, or the branched character of Sarcophyte, 
consists of numerous erect spadices, densely covered with flowers.” 
In the same volume (p. 415) is a valuable paper “On the origin 
and development of the pitchers of .Vepenthes.” But perhaps 
Hooker’s most important contribution to the Linnean Society is his 
very able monograph on “Welwitschia, a new genus of Gnetacez,” 
which appears in Vol. XXIV. Professor Asa Gray says of it:— 
“This splendid memoir stands unrivalled among botanical mono- 
graphs of the kind for perfection of illustration, elucidation of 
structure, and insight into affinities.” 
In 1860, Hooker made a tour to Syria, and on his return home, 
presented a paper on “The three Oaks of Palestine” to the Linnean 
Society. 
