MORPHOLOGY OF WELWITSCHIA MIEABILIS. 
105 
Correction of an Error as to the Morphology of 
Welwitschia Mirabilis. 
By 
F. O. Bower. 
At the conclusion of the second article on Welwitschia 
mirabilis communicated by me to this Journal (vol. xxi, 
New Series, 1881, p. 571), a postscript was appended, which 
suggested a possible explanation of the discrepancy between 
my observations of the process of development of this remark- 
able plant, and those of M. Naudin, who communicated an 
account of the germination of the same plant to the ‘ Gar- 
dener's Chronicle/ August 13th, 1881. The origin of the dis- 
crepancy was, however, soon after explained by a second letter 
from M. Naudin, published in the ‘Gardener’s Chronicle/ 
January 7th, 1882, which began as follows : “ I find that by an 
accident, the seedling which I took to be that of Welwit- 
schia, having sown the seed as such, and which I described in 
your columns (1881, vol. xvi, p. 217), is really not a Wel- 
witschia at all; all my Welwitschias (true) died, &c.” 
I had intended that this matter dealt with in my postscript 
should have died a natural death, and I should not have again 
returned to it, had it not been that in the reference to my 
article above quoted, which appears in the ‘ Botanischer 
Jahresbericht/ for 1881, Erste Abtheilung, Heft ii, p. 459, 
altogether undue prominence is given to the subject, by intro- 
ducing it thus : “ Das wichtigste in morphologischer Hinsicht 
bringt ein Postscriptum whereas, when the facts are known, 
this is the least important part of the whole article. 
Since there has been this misunderstanding, it may be well 
here to state briefly what the actual succession of members is 
