134 
Mr. Brown's Observations on the 
ture, so nearly resembling that of Composite, seems to strengthen 
the analogical argument in favour of the hypothesis advanced in 
the present paper—of the compound nature of the pistillum in 
that order> and of its type in phaenogamous plants generally;— 
Brunonia having an obvious and near affinity to Goodenovice , in 
*he greater part of whose genera the ovarium has actually two 
cJls with one or an indefinite number of ovula in each; while in 
a few genera of the same order, as Dampiera , Diaspasis, and cer¬ 
tain species of Sccevola , it is equally reduced to one cell and a single 
ovulum. 
Sir James Smith, in establishing Brunonia as a genus, is disposed 
to refer it to Dipsacecc . To certain species of this order it, indeed, 
bears a striking resemblance in habit; it also very nearly agrees 
with them in its remarkable inflorescence; and one great objec¬ 
tion to its union with them may be supposed to be removed in 
adopting M. Decandolle’s account of their ovarium. 
But as Brunonia differs from the whole order in the following- 
characters, all of which are of primary importance;—namely, in 
the origin and aestivation of corolla ; in the insertion and whole 
structure of stamina; in the indusium of the stigma; in the ovu¬ 
lum being inserted at the base of the cavity of the ovarium; in 
the erect embryo and want of albumen ;—I continue to think that 
its proper place in the natural method is between Goodenovice and 
Compositce. 
I shall conclude this subject, by proposing a few queries re¬ 
specting the indusium of Brunonia and Goodenovice. 
Is this remarkable covering of the stigma in these families 
merely a process of the apex of the style ? or is it a part of di¬ 
stinct origin, though intimately cohering with the pistillum ? On 
the latter supposition, may it not be considered as analogous to 
the glandular disk surrounding or crowning the ovarium in many 
other 
