310 
PKOFES.SOK K. PEARSOX AXD OTHERS OX 
collated liy various less active helpers. Tlius the series is really an omnibus series, 
although mainly from the (^uantocks. Dr. Lee tabulated the data and calculated the 
constants. 
My other two series are of the Sliirley Po})})y, a vnll-knoM'n and beautiful garden 
variety. 
Series (iv.). Chelsea Shirley Foppy .—These plants were grown by my colleague, 
Ih-ofessor F. O. Oliver, in his garden at Chelsea. The plants had scarcely been 
thinned, and so, being very crowded, grew tall, and with few buds on the plant. The 
plants were taken up and forwarded to me by rail, hut being delayed in transit 
sutfered a great deal, so that a good many capsules were broken olf, or could not he 
counted. These circumstances account for the smallness of the number of pairs 
obtained from each plant. Professor Oliver kindly came and assisted me in the 
counting. The data were tabulated and reduced by myself. 
Series (v.). Buckinghamshire Shirley Poprjy .—These plants were grown at 
Hampden Farm Flouse, and covei'ed a large border. They were extremely healthy, 
large plants, and I have counted as many as 120 capsules on a single plant 1 The 
plants were taken up singly as they had done flowering and the hands counted. The 
labour of counting was severe, as there were 4443 cajisules on 176 plants as compared 
w ith 1020 capsules on 325 Chelsea poppies. The tabulation involved the entry of 
197,478 pairs, perhaps the largest number we have yet dealt with in a single corre¬ 
lation table ; this and the determination of the constants is the work of Dr. Lee. 
The reader wall notice that the investigations on poppies difler largely from those 
on the leaves of trees. In the latter case, 26 leaves were taken at random from the 
trees and the character on eacli measured. In the former case, every available 
capsule wns dealt wdth. These, of course, are not all the capsules put forth by the 
plant, and the proportion of these two sets wnuld vary considerably from one series to 
anothei', approaching fairly close to equality in my wild poppies fi'om the top of the 
Chilterns, and difleriug very considerably in the Shirley poppies from Chelsea. In the 
leaves of the trees no tree was weighted by its size or vigour ; in the case of a 
vigorous poppy, hownver, it may contribute ten times as maiw pairs to our table as a 
feeble plant. There is a good deal to he said for both methods of dealing with the 
problem, and even for a third method to wdiich I shall refer immediately. If we pick 
up two leaves at random and wish to consider the probability that they belong to one 
tree, wn ought certainly to allow' for the larger number of pairs of leaves on the 
larner trees; if wn wash to discover to wdiat extent tw'o I'andondv chosen men have 
characters like to those of lirothers, we ounht certainlv to allow for the larire 
families, even if wn do not deal wdth eveiy possible pair of brothers in those families. 
I'hese two diflerent methods of dealing wdth resemblance due either to the ])roduction 
of like organs by the individual or to heredity must be carefully borne in mind. In 
dealing wdth Mr. Galtox’s data for stature^" I have taken every jiossible pair of 
* ‘ Phil. Trans.,’ A, vol. 187, pp. 253-318. 
