LEAF IN THE VASCULAR CRYPTOGAMS AND GYMNOSPERMS. 
567 
we do not, or at least not in all cases. I admit that no serious objection can be 
urged to applying this distinction of foliar base and upper leaf to simple, unbranched 
leaves, as in the Monocotyledons and Coniferse, provided the parts develop in such a 
way as to warrant the distinction. But in leaves which are branched the case is 
different, and it may be stated that it was chiefly with such leaves that Eichler was 
engaged when he first introduced the terms. When we distinguish between the 
foliar base and the upper leaf in a branch leaf, we divide the leaf into two parts which 
are not coordinate : on the one hand we place the basal part of the main axis of a 
branch-system, on the other the upper part of that axis until its branches of all 
orders. Such a distinction might be compared with that between the bole of a 
forest tree below the lowest branches on the one hand, and the whole of the upper 
part of the tree, including the upper part of the main axis together with its branches 
of all orders on the other. Such a treatment, though very obvious, can hardly be 
called scientific, and would not lead to a true insight into the morphology of the 
tree, such as might be obtained by following the main axis upwards, and tracing its 
identity from base to apex, and its relation to the branches, &c. It may have been 
thought that the peculiar conformations often found at the base of the leaf even in 
a comparatively early state of development would justify the distinction ; but those 
peculiarities are the result of phenomena of distribution of growth of a nature which 
would not be allowed to be of sufficient morphological importance to justify such a 
distinction of parts in an axial branch system. 
The most important point in the morphological study of a shoot or branch system 
is to ascertain the mode of origin and the sequence of appearance of the various parts, 
and their relations in these respects one to another ; the greater importance being, 
as a rule, attached to those phenomena which are of earliest date. Thus, in treating 
of axes and branch systems, the time of origin, and the mode and point of first 
appearance are regarded as of greater morphological import than subsequent 
changes of conformation, brought about by peculiarities of the distribution and 
localisation of the intensity of growth, however greatly those changes may affect the 
general outline of the number or branch system. Thus in the common Hyacinth no 
radical distinction is drawn between the short lower part of the axis (the conn), which 
bears the scales of the bulb together with the foliage leaves, and the elongated part 
of the axis (the scape), which bears the flowers : both are recognised as parts of the 
same axis, though the difference in the distribution of the longitudinal growth in 
different parts of it is very great. Again, in certain shoots of Vitis gongyloides, of 
the Potato, &c., transverse growth is found to preponderate at certain points, 
resulting in the formation of fleshy swellings ; but any morphologist, overlooking the 
results of excessive transverse growth, will still recognise in those structures a 
peculiar development of a part of the axis, which however still retains for him its 
identity throughout. Thus in treating of axes, morphologists recognise clearly that 
the mode of origin, and the mutual relations of members on their first appearance are 
