THE DUAL LICHEN II YPOTIIESIS. 
123 
manner. It is almost needless to say much under this head, having 
already shown, as we proceeded, that all the phenomena of lichen 
life are wholly compatible with the assumption that these organisms 
are, in themselves, true, simple, autonomous plants. If, also, we 
are right in the conclusion that the hypothesis fails when submitted 
to the two preceding tests, the natural inference will be from the 
arguments already adduced, that all the phenomena which any 
Lichen exhibits are compatible with a simple organism. The 
Theorists admit, by their hypothesis, that all the phenomena, 
except the gonidia, are wholly compatible with a plant which they 
call a Fungus. Although we do not admit that Fungus is the 
correct name to be given to the plant, we also affirm that it affords 
evidence of being a simple plant, but with the addition of the 
gonidia, which we hold to be as possible as gonidia enclosed within 
the substance of a Fistulina or a Polyporus, and not only possibly, 
or even, probably, organs of the Lichen, but that positively such is 
the case. We require no counter hypothesis, therefore, to support 
our view, but urge, on the contrary, that where an organism is seen 
to exist, and continues to reproduce itself in conformity with a 
certain type, it is folly to attempt, by multiplying causes, to account 
for phenomena in an abnormal manner, which can be readily 
accounted for by normal causes. 
When we see an organism in possession of certain organs, which 
organs perform certain functions, however small, and these organs 
and functions are inherited and transmitted, there is a pretty strong 
presumption that all our efforts to demonstrate external causes, to 
account for phenomena already well accounted for, we shall only 
embark on a profitless speculation. At present there are still a few 
who are content with this view of the Lichens, and do not crave 
the novelty of a dual hypothesis. 
I cannot forbear indicating what I consider so often a source of 
error in questions of this kind, which is, the mistaking of analogy 
for identity. Unless I am much mistaken, that error is not absent 
from this hypothesis. Fungi of that division known as the Asco- 
mycetes, have a certain kind of reproductive organs. The sporidia, 
normally eight, are contained in elongated sacs, called asci, which 
are placed side by side, mixed with other thread-like bodies, called 
parapbvses, and these together constitute the hymenium. Because, 
in Lichens, alike system of reproductive organs prevail; instead of 
accepting Lichens as analagous to Fungi in their reproduction, it is 
assumed, without proof, that they are identical. 
Again, certain Fungi, called the Discomycetes, have these repro- 
ductive bodies enclosed in an open receptacle, like a cup ; because 
certain lichens have also their reproductive organs enclosed in a 
receptacle of a similar form, though not of the same internal struc- 
ture, instead of recognising this as an analogy, the theorists at 
once assume identity, and, practically, they argue thus. Certain 
Fungi have spores enclosed in asci, so have the Lichens, ergo the 
Lichens are Fungi. Certain Fungi have their reproductive organs 
