INSECTIVOROUS PLANTS. 



401 



at the deflexed point of each lobe. The singular aspect of 

 the flower caused the first English settlers in their native place 

 to give it the name of " Side-saddle Flower." In Gerarde's< 

 " Herbal" (1597) there is a characteristic figure of Sarracenia { 8a«** 

 purpurea, where it is called " Hollow-leaved Sea-Lavender." 

 Darlingtonia calif ornica is a notable member of this family. 

 The pitchers differ from those of Sarracenia in being twisted, 

 and in widening as they reach the apex, which forms a hood. 

 This appendage appears as if perforated at the upper part, and 

 terminates in two fish-tail-like prolongations, which give it a 

 most curious appearance. 



The only remaining member of this family is Heliamphora 

 nutans, which was discovered on Mount Koraima some years ago. 

 Living plants were brought to this country, and it is now being 

 cultivated by the Messrs. Veitch at Chelsea. It differs from all 

 the other members of the family in having several flowers on a 

 scape, which are destitute of a corolla. 



The Utricularias, of which there are 150 species, are mostly 

 aquatic, but some exotic species are terrestrial or epiphytic. The 

 aquatic plants are entirely destitute of roots, and the submerged 

 stem and branches are clothed with leaves which are cut 

 up into slender filiform segments, and on these segments 

 numerous little bladders or ampulla are developed. The leaves 

 are tipped with short, straight bristles. The plants float near 

 the surface of the water, above which they send their flowers, 

 supported on slender stalks. The bladders of Utricularia 

 possess a most ingenious trap-door mechanism which only 

 opens inwards, so that when a Cyclops or other animalcule 

 is once in, it must remain there. All over the interior of 

 the bladder small processes called " quadrifids " are placed, 

 which are supposed to be the active agents in the absorption of 

 the liquid products. As in Sarracenia, the insects captured 

 are not digested, but simply undergo decomposition. When 

 Darwin's work first appeared numerous objections were made 

 as to accepting his conclusions, on the a priori ground that 

 digestion was too purely an animal function to be conceivable of 

 plants. So little is the matter now doubted by physiologists, how- 

 ever, that it is all but unanimously accepted by them as a modifica- 

 tion of the universal process of digestion alike in animals and 

 plants. The most serious objection, to my mind, was that raised 



