THE EltITISII FLOEA. 
37 
which plants so revel in; yet this objection may be to a great extent 
met by the special contriving of two or three routes to a goal, and 
all things considered, we are satisfied it is the best plan to adopt in 
a work intended for beginners as well as accustomed botanists. It 
is extremely difficult, if* not impossible, to treat the definitions of 
Classes, Sub-classes, and Orders, and other larger divisions of Flower¬ 
ing Plants, in such a way that they shall be practically available to 
young botanists. An Arum or a Tamus is almost sure to be a 
Dicotyledon, while Myriophyllum and the like make excellent Mono¬ 
cotyledons. Nor is it possible they can decide the knotty question 
whether the Pine and Yew are naked-seeded or not. 
The general plan of arrangement in the British Floras is the 
same; the Candollean sequence of the Orders being adopted. This is 
well, since the tendency on the part of some Continental botanists 
to distribute the Orders differently, in conformity with peculiar and 
not generally adopted views of affinity is detrimental to science, and 
without any advantage compensating for the great inconvenience 
thus occasioned to botanists, to whom facility of reference is of 
high importance. This applies to general features. There are little 
alterations, transpositions and combinations of Orders which might 
probably be made, perhaps in each of our wnrks, but the general 
plan and sequence is too securely founded to be lightly deranged. 
Of these minor changes we may note as occurring to us by way of 
example, the Purslane Order, which we suppose Mr. Bentham would 
now place near the Pinks and Elatines. The Catkin Family cer¬ 
tainly ought to be treated differently. We are constantly asked what 
is meant by Amentacece. Certainly no single Natural Order, as we 
understand such, can include the genera grouped under this term 
by Messrs. Bentham and Babington. These constitute an “Alliance” 
of Orders rather than an “ Order.” Prof. Babington does not mend 
matters by describing the ovary of his Amentiferse as “usually simple,” 
while seven of the ten genera mentioned have an ovary with two or 
more cells, in several of them adnate to the perianth ; “ simple” ap¬ 
plied to this case, he tells us in his glossary, means “ not compound.” 
While upon the subject of the larger groups we would point out 
that, general ordinal definitions might, in some instances, be made 
fuller with, advantage in Mr. Bentham’s Plandbook, especially that his 
work is often found in the hands of students, who ought not to be 
satisfied with such a meagre notice as we find in the case of the 
Mignonette Family, which is surely as important to the British bo¬ 
tanist as the Polemonium Family, described at some length. “ Ovules 
inserted under the catkin-scales, or solitary and quite exposed,” is 
not clear in the account of the Pine Family. If Onagracese rightly 
include Hippuris , “ ovary sometimes one-celled” should be added. 
Perhaps the most striking feature resulting from a comparison of 
our Floras is the wide difference in the value assigned to species by 
their respective writers. While Mr. Babington’s Manual (Ed. iv.) 
contains 1708, Messrs. Hooker and Arnott have but 1571, and Mr. 
