404 
Insects  and  Flo  vers. 
Am.  Jour.  Pharm. 
Aug.,  1886. 
That  insects,  attracted  by  conspicuous  petals,  or  from  a  distance 
by  scent,  always  presupposing  that  they  are  possessed  of  similar 
organs  to  our  own,  may  have  influence  in  the  maintenance  of  colored 
species  is  not  denied,  for  that  would  be  to  impair  the  rational  doc- 
trine of  the  survival  of  the  fittest. 
The  cultivator  who  carries  out  a  like  selection  corroborates  its 
wisdom,  but  he  does  not  depend  alone  on  choice,  and  is  well  aware 
that  he  must  make  use  of  the  many  other  means  to  attain  his  end.  It 
is  quite  admitted  that  to  the  horticulturist  the  value  of  intercrossing 
is  great.  He  may  obtain  finer  flowers,  to  fetch  a  higher  price,  but 
it  is  much  more  than  doubtful  if,  in  the  bare  struggle  for  existence, 
the  help  of  insects  is  indispensable;  on  the  contrary,  such  absolute 
dependence  on  external  agency  must  naturally  be  as  much  a  source  of 
hindrance  as  a  want  of  self-reliance  is  to  a  man  who  desires  to  get  on 
in  his  struggle  for  life. 
The  question  is  this:  Is  cross-fertilization  actually  necessary  for 
the  perpetuation  of  plants,  or  is  it  even  so  desirable  as  we  are  told 
that  it  is,  and  is  color  in  flowers  a  mere  expedient  for  getting  them- 
selves cross-fertilized?  We  know  that  brilliant  hues  undoubtedly 
exist,  when,  so  far  as  we  can  see,  they  confer  no  benefit  on  their 
possessor ;  that  some  flowers  are  at  their  brightest  wdien  fertiliza- 
tion is  over,  and  that  there  are  large  families  which  are  wholly 
independent  of  insects,  and  yet  show  no  signs  of  degeneration  or 
extinction. 
There  is  still  another  question :  Is  the  development  of  beauty  of  no 
account  in  the  plan  of  the  universe?  It  is  now  distinctly  stated 
that  gay  colors  in  fruit  and  flowers  serve  solely  as  guides  to  birds 
and  beasts,  in  order  that  the  fruit  may  be  devoured  and  the  seeds 
disseminated,  and  that  it  is  a  fallacious  opinion  that  mere  beauty  and 
variety  are  objects  in  nature;  but  if  such  be  the  case,  wre  must  also 
give  a  reason  for  the  rich  attire  of  clouds,  the  harmonies  of  woodland 
shades,  the  sparkle  of  the  streams,  no  less  than  for  "the  flower- 
inwoven  mantle  of  the  earth." 
These  utilitarian  theorists,  however,  have  not  yet  taken  all  the 
world  by  storm;  there  still  exist  careful  observers  who  do  not  hesi- 
tate to  believe  in  "Uselessness  divinest  of  a  use  the  finest/'  who  see 
that  the  veil  is  not  yet  lifted,  and  who  acknowledge  that  the  greatest 
wizard  is  the  man  who  best  knows  the  secrets  of  the  vegetable  world. 
— Phar.  Jour,  and  Trans.,  June  5,  1886. 
