2?4 BOTANY. 
general obfervations of Gaertner on this head, with re- 
Spe£l to the cryptogamous clafs ; it may be difficult to point 
out the work from whence any material information is to 
be derived, refpedting the economy of nature, in the ori¬ 
gin and mode of increafe peculiar to this numerous branch 
of the algas. For while we have caufe to iament that the 
remarks which cafually occur upon this particular fubjedt 
in the celebrated work of Balter, are fo very few, and con¬ 
fined only to two or three fpecies; we may find as little reafon 
to be fatisfied with the ingenious but fpeculative,theory, 
which Reaumur has given in the A6la Gallica, upon the 
florefcence of the fucus. It mult be allowed that many de- 
fcriptions, which we meet with in various botanical works, 
with refpedl to the fructification of marine plants, appear 
rather to be founded on the analogy fuppofed to exilt be¬ 
tween vegetables in general, than on any adtua! obferva¬ 
tions relulting from a feries of experimental difcoveries. 
To this it may be added, that much information cannot 
reafonably be expedited from the curfory remarks of thofe, 
who pay fiiort and cafual vilits to the fea-fhore: when the 
want of feafonable opportunities to attend repeatedly to 
the gradual changes which thefe plants may undergo, mult 
render doubtful the oblervations, and oftentimes frultrate 
the attempts of the molt ingenious inveltigators. 
“It ought not to be matter of furprife, that fo fimall a 
(hare of information fhould have been communicated to 
the public, by Linnaeus, with refpedl to the extenlive ge¬ 
nera of fucufes and confervas. It mult rather excite our 
altonilhmenf, that, in the immenfe chaos of the vegetable 
world, which became harmonized and reduced to order 
by his arduous and unexampled affiduity ; even the mi¬ 
nuted parts Ihould have been brought forward, and fepa- 
rated under fijeh judicious and well-adapted diltinCtions ; 
that the progrefs of inveltigation and arrangement, what¬ 
ever theory may prevail as to the mode of propagation pe¬ 
culiar to each, mult be unqueltionably facilitated and pro¬ 
moted. An appeal front any part of a fyftem, which from 
its diltinguilhed excellence lias juftly fuperfeded all others, 
mult appear under an unfavourable afpedl. Yet it is to 
be obferved, that the principle itfelf on which Linnaeus 
has eltablilhed his fyltem, did not by any means appear 
clearly afeertained to its illultrious author, as far as relates 
to that particular part of vegetable hiftory which comes 
under our prefent conlideration : although from the defi¬ 
nitions of the generic characters, which he has given of 
the fea-plants, as well as from data laid down in fundry 
parts of his works, he lliews how (trongly inclined he was 
to extend his hypothefis, even to thofe undefined parts of 
vegetation, which either from their extreme limplicity or 
rninutenefs, have vindicated the propriety of their being 
fixed under an anomalous arrangement, with refpedt to the 
fexual fyltem. 
“ We may not probably find in the whole circle of na¬ 
tural hiftory, a work more adapted to convey inftrudtion, 
or which carries with it a fairer claim to pre-eminence, than 
the Philofophia Botanica of this author : not merely as 
being the ground-work of the fyftem it is meant to eitab- 
lifti, or for the precifion and beautiful mode of arrange¬ 
ment, which appears in every part of it; blit as affording 
fatisfaCtory proofs of the importance of that fcience, which 
is fo evidently calculated to difplay the wonderful economy 
of Creative Wifdom. It may in fome meafure counter¬ 
balance the regret which mull naturally arife in the inqui- 
fitive mind, from the very fuccindl and compendious man¬ 
ner in which this work is comprifed, to find that many of 
the mod important aphorifms contained in it, have given 
rife to feveral interefting and philofophical difquifitions, 
publilhed under the aufpices and approbation of Linnaeus 
himlelf, in a well known work, entitled Amcenitates Aca¬ 
demics. Among thefe, one trad in particular may be 
confidered as a curious and fatisfadlory illuftration of thofe 
data on which the fexual fyftem more immediately depends. 
Here we find exemplified the protecting influence of na¬ 
ture, adapted to all the varied exigencies of her extenlive 
families. Among the inftances of this admirable economy, 
we do not meet with one more Angularly imprefttve than 
that which occurs in the fubmerfed aquatic plants. Se¬ 
veral of thefe at the critical period of their florefcence, 
and at no other time, are obferved to emerge juft above 
the furface of the water, that the fertilizing effluvia, un- 
obftrudled in the lighter medium of the atmofphere, may 
without interruption attain its deftined ftation : which end 
being accomplilhCd, they foon after fubfide. If in plants 
of this defeription, produced in tranquil waters, fuch ex¬ 
traordinary provilion for the propagation of their feveral 
fpecies is found to be expedient ; and, on the other hand, 
the powers of nature, according to the dodlrine laid down 
in the fyftem, continue to a£l by general and unvarying 
laws : it mult neceffarily occafion fome difficulty to account 
for the propagation of that numerous tribe of plants, which 
though permanently fixed, and frequently at confiderable 
depths in the ocean, find an element congenial to tlieic 
mode of increafe. But here our inquiries are no longer 
fupported by that analogy, which accompanies the known 
laws and progreflive (late of vegetation. Upon the firft 
examination of a marine plant, it muft appear, that the 
comparifon, which lias been made between the ladleal vef- 
fels in animals, and the fibres of roots in terreftrial plants, 
does not in any degree extend to the former. The roots of 
the fucus, fo far from preparing and diftributino- the ali¬ 
mentary juices by abforbent veftels, feem by their durable 
and impervious texture, only calculated to fecure to them- 
felves a ftation. We find them attached to the fmootheft: 
ftones and other bodies, utterly incapable of affording any 
kind of nutrition. From the evident properties of their 
roots, as well as from their general ftrudhire, thefe plants 
do not feem to poflefs a feries of veftels, by which the 
fluids are propelled. It is true, this defeat is in many Ipe- 
cies amply compenfated for, by numerous pores varioufly 
interfperfed throughout the furface of the irons. To as¬ 
certain this fa£t, it has been ingenioufly remarked, that if 
a dried fpecimen be immerfed in water, it will foon acquire 
its former tone and (late : but if the experiment be only 
partially applied, then that part, which is kept free from 
moifture, will continue arid and lifelefs. A conchifive ar¬ 
gument, that the fucufes, as far as the experiment has 
been made, do not poflefs any veftels, by which the fluids 
may be diftributed, agreeably to the more ordinary procels 
of nature. 
“ It may in this place not be improper to examine the 
theory laid down by a celebrated French naturalift, in the 
early part of the prefent century, relative to the florefcence 
which has been aferibed to thefe plants in common with 
all others ; and made a leading principle of the fexual fyf. 
tern. Reaumur, the author alluded to, imagined he had 
difeovered in the Fucus veliculofus, and in the Fucus fer- 
ratus, both flowers and feeds; the former of thefe, indis¬ 
criminately occupying the furface of the frons. He de- 
feribes each flower as a tuft of extremely minute threads 
or filaments, the longed of them not being a line in length : 
yet after the moft accurate inveftigation, he acknowledges 
he was not able to difeover the anthers at the extremities 
of thefe threads, fo neceffary to eftablilh the fundlion of 
the ftamens; and of courfe was prevented from determin¬ 
ing their preciSe character. In order to get over this dif¬ 
ficulty, he confidently maintains the probability of the 
anthers having-fallen off, at the time when the filaments 
firft difclofed themfelves : and further obferves, that thofe 
flowers only, which are (ituated at the extremities of the 
leaves, are inftrumental in promoting the grains or feeds 
contained therein. The aperture, through which thefe 
threads appear, he confiders as the calyx. In feveral 
other fpecies, he obferved the fmall veffels or capfules con¬ 
tained in the fwollenand diftended Summits of the leaves; 
but not the fmalleft appearance of thofe threads or fup¬ 
pofed floral parts. In others again, thefe laft were very 
vilible, without the former: for inStance, the Fucus no- 
dofus and Fucus canaliculatus, exhibited very diftindlly 
their feed-veffels, but were entirely deftitute of the fila¬ 
ments. Our author therefore takes it for granted, that 
