56 W. C. Worsdeli. 
indications of the true nature of organs whose morphological 
character is doubtful; and, in almost every case, there is something 
useful to be gleaned from their study. 
In the phenomenon of “ fasciation,” 1 which literally means a 
“banding” or a “bundling,” there would seem, at first sight, 
comparatively little that requires attention. Yet, as 1 hope to 
shew below, there are involved in a close consideration of this 
strange phenomenon, some by no means easy problems which 
demand solution. 
I should like, first of all, to dwell for a while, upon two sets 
of phenomena, without a due consideration of which the facts of 
“ fasciation ” cannot in my opinion be understood. These two sets 
of phenomena are: (1) the fusion of organs or tissues which were 
once distinct; and (2) the branching of an organ or tissue which is 
primarily a unity. 
I.—Negative D£doublement or Cohesion. 
Now in the first place I must necessarily define exactly 
what is meant by the expressions “ fusion ” or “ cohesion,” and 
“ once distinct,” ’ere we proceed to discuss the first set of 
phenomena. Let me here state at once my appreciation of the 
profound importance attaching to the recognition of the fact that 
there are two kinds of “ fusion,” cohesion,” “ adhesion,” or what¬ 
ever term is preferred, as also to a clear distinction being drawn 
between the two. The two sorts of “ fusion ” may be called 
respectively (1) “ postgenital ” and (2) “ congenital ,” in other words 
(1) “ real or mechanical and (2) ideal.” Now, the old school of 
botanists represented, e.g. by such writers as Schleiden, Duchartre, 
Moquin-Tandon, &c., were unable to make this distinction ; they 
could only recognise one kind of fusion, as existing between organs, 
viz., that which takes place subsequent to birth or development; 
a fusion which could be actually observed under the microscope, and 
of the existence of which there could, therefore, be no dispute. 
Where was the possibility of the existence of any other sort of 
fusion, than this ? they asked. This is the only real fusion of 
organs that can be conceived of! But it is the old story once 
again ! These older botanists, like some few, alas! to-day, fell into 
error owing to the fact that they relied, in the interpretation of the 
phenomena observed, entirely and solely on ontogeny or the indivi¬ 
dual development instead of on phylogeny or the history of the race. 
Above all, the comparative method was neglected and despised 
'Latin “ fascia ” a banding. 
