Notes . 
1 66 
lend any support to his view. I therefore conclude that the lid of the 
pitcher represents the first pair of pinnae. Dr. Macfarlane further 
regards as pinnae those lateral growths which appear upon the terminal 
spur; these had not escaped my attention (p. 243, also Figs. 8, 16, 
Plate XVI) ; but the irregularity of their occurrence, their form, and 
their arrangement make me doubt their being of the nature of pinnae. 
The adoption by Dr. Macfarlane of a view of the leaf of Nepenthes , 
which on the above grounds I think is a mistaken one, has led him to 
an equally erroneous interpretation of the leaf of Sarrace?iia. He 
would regard this also as a compound leaf, and especially he would 
take the dorsal (or adaxial) flap, which is often so marked a character 
of the leaf, to consist of ‘ opposite leaf-lobes whose faces are not only 
applied to each other, but organically fused ; ' as support of this con- 
clusion he examines the development, and especially the vascular 
arrangement. 
Figs. 1, 2, 3 show successive stages of development of the leaf of Sarracenia 
flava . i t involution to form the pitcher. X, the upper limit of the sheath. 
In criticising this conclusion I would first remark that the absence 
of distinctive evidence from external form is an objection to such a 
view. I have examined young leaves of Sarracenia flava (Figs. 1, 2, 
3), and do not find at any point upon them any formation of such 
rounded and distinctly convex growths as we associate with the term 
leaflet, or pinna ; nor does Dr. Macfarlane himself mention or figure 
any such. The leaf is, however, a winged one, and the wings are 
developed at its base so as to form a sheath, the wings converging 
and terminating at the upper limit of the sheath ( X in Figs. 2, 3) ; 
the part above this is not distinctly winged ; towards the apex an 
