202 
Review. 
usefully occupied by bibliography, index, plates, and the like. The 
page is not closely printed, there are very few foot-notes, and the 
text is reduced in bulk by the welcome introduction of many 
illustrations. Such a volume would be a miracle of compression if 
it presented a complete account of all that is now known concerning 
the Morphology of Angiosperms. But this is no examination 
manual, hateful alike to teachers and students: it is an eminently 
readable book with a distinct individuality, and its authors have 
achieved brevity by selection not compression. 
The principle of selection is suggested in the Preface: indeed 
aph rase from the concluding paragraph might serve as a motto to 
the whole volume—“The final aim of morphology is a definite 
phylogeny.” Accordingly the morphological characters chosen for 
treatment in detail are those which have yielded or are likely to 
yield evidence concerning the race-history of Angiosperms. The 
subject-matter of the treatise may be divided roughly under six 
heads: the origin and development of the gametophyte (Chaps. II.— 
VIII.), embryology (Chap. IX ), floral structure (Chaps. X.—XII.), 
geographical distribution (Chap. XIII.), geological history (Chap. 
XIV.), and finally the vegetative anatomy of the Angiospermous 
sporophyte as compared with that of the sporophyte among Gymnos- 
perms (Chaps. XVI., XVII., by Professor E. C. Jeffrey). 
The introductory chapter deals with two subjects : the separation 
of the Angiosperms from the Gymnosperms, and the internal divi¬ 
sion of the Angiosperms into Monocotyledons and Dicotyledons. 
On the former question the tendency of recent research has been 
to reveal the isolation of the Angiosperms at the same time that 
the connexion of Gymnosperms with Pteridophytes is demonstrated 
with increasing clearness. The authors give an admirable sketch of 
the evidence which has led to this change in botanical opinion, and 
they do not hesitate to draw the logical conclusion. “ In our 
judgment.Gymnosperms and Angiosperms should be recog¬ 
nized as two groups co ordinate with Pteridophytes and Bryophytes. 
In fact Pteridophytes and Gymnosperms together form a much 
more natural group than do Gymnosperms and Angiosperms;—” 
It is for this reason that “ the present volume is issued not as Part 
II. of Morphology of Spennatophytcs (Part I. dealing with Gymnos¬ 
perms appeared in 1901), but as an independent volume entitled 
Morphology of Angiosperms." 
The characters which separate Monocotyledons from Dicoty¬ 
ledons are described at some length in this first chapter, but their 
