1836. BROMHEAD, Sir E. French, Bart. This author's system first appeared in the Edinburgh Journ. Apr. 1836, and has since been more than once revised to embrace the later discoveries of the science. The last published revision was in the Mag. Nat. Hist. July, 1840. The writer proposes to proceed wholly by induction. The families are collected into Alliances, designated by a termination in ales, from some characteristic or well-known family contained in the assemblage. Each family is placed in that Alliance in which it may meet the greatest number of families of admitted affinity to it, the character being subsequently deduced from the assemblage so constituted, and used as a test of admissibility in the more doubtful cases. -See Mag. Nat. Hist. April, 1838. A sketch of characters for the whole series of Alliances as they stood in 1838 appeared in the Edinb. Phil. Journ. April and July of that year. He considers it an advantage that above 60 of his Alliances are to be found indicated or adopted with more or less accuracy by other Botanists. He has given some of these synonyms in the Phil. Mag. July, 1837, and in the Mag. Nat Hist. July, 1840. The author arranges with great care the contents of each Alliance in the order of the immediate affinities and transitions, and then places each Alliance between the two Alliances into which it passes. He considers himself to have thus established by induction a continuous series of Alliances, commencing with Algals and ending with Fungals, in which each family in a continuous succession stands between the two families of nearest affinity. The system thus resulting presents the aspect of two parallel races meeting in the Rhizanths, and presenting in their progress, at equal distances from the commencement, analogous Alliances, such, for instance, as Rosales and Fabales, Boraginales and Lamiales, Geraniales and Rutales, &c. In the Alliances, and in the grouping of the Alliances, the system accords with the quinary method; but to this the author does not bind himself, remarking that quinary combinations very frequently occur, and that he has extended them for the sake of convenience, by leaning towards that method in cases where the limits of families are ambiguous. He considers the theory of the circulation of organic forms to be confirmed by his method, but does not look on them as closed or re-entering circles. He would rather compare them to the approach of the returning parts of a spiral or to the similarity of the opposite ends of a fusiform figure. The subjoined table of his Alliances shows their succession, but the transitions and contents of the Alliances could not be exhibited without giving his tables at length. A.-Nostocales. RACE OF THE ALGE. B. Fucales, rhodomelales, ulvales, charales, osmundales. C.- Ephedrales, myricales, ulmales, piperales, haloragales, cenotherales, myrtales, rosales, saxifragales, cucurbitales, portulacales, chenopodiales, polemoniales, boraginales, solanales, gentianales, apocynales, cinchonales, sambucales, cornales, geraniales, cistales, brassicales, nymphæales, aristolochiales. C. C.-Alismales, restiales, agrostidales, cocoales, typhales. C. C. C.-Cytinales. A-Mucorales. RACE OF THE FUNGI. B.-Auriculariales, lycoperdales, usneales, jungermanniales, lycopodiales. C.-Cupressales, betulales, rhamnales, euphorbiales, æsculales, hypericales, limoniales, fabales, violales, passiflorales, homaliales, elæagnales, acanthales, lamiales, rhinanthales, ericales, campanulales, asterales, dipsacales, myrsinales, rutales, malvales, laurales, magnoliales, menispermales. C. C.-Asparagales, juncales, orchidales, zingiberales, narcissales. C. C. C.-Cytinales. 1836. LINDLEY, John.-(A Natural System of Botany, &c., second edition.) The arrangement here adopted was nearly the same as that proposed in the Nirus Plantarum (see p. xli.) An attempt was also made to reform the nomenclature of the Natural System, by making all the names of divisions of the same value end in the same way. The Orders were distinguished by ending in acea, the Sub-orders in ca, the Alliances in ales, and certain combinations, called groups, in osa. It was conceived that certain advantages and conveniences would attend the establishment of uniformity in these matters. Botanists do not, however, appear to be as yet disposed to entertain this opinion, and the terminations have not been generally adopted, in part, no doubt, because of the difficulty of adapting them to Greek and Latin compounds. 1836-1840. ENDLICHER, Stephen.-(Genera Plantarum secundum ordines naturale disposita.) Upon this system has been published the most important systematical work that has appeared since the Genera Plantarum of Jussieu, in 1789. It commences with plants of the simplest kind, and closes with what the author regards as most complicated, viz., leguminous plants. It has been executed with great skill, but is too much dependent upon mere theoretical considerations, and is difficult to use in consequence of the looseness of the characters assigned to what the author names Classes, which are equivalent to my Alliances. The following are the details of his system :— No opposition of stem and root. No spiral vessels. No sexes. Spores lengthen-} THALLOPHYTA. ing in all directions PROTOPHYTA. Born without soil: feeding by the surface: fructification vague all the organs at once.) cases. AMPHIBRYA. Gymnospermа. Both sexes present. Seeds embryoless, of many spores. Hysterophyta. Stem growing at the circumference Stem growing at both point and circumference Ovules naked, receiving impregnation immediately by the foramen the base of the stamens, occasionally abortive.) Dialypetala. Region I. THALLOPHYTA. Section 1. PROTOPHYTA. Cohort I. ANOPHYTA. Class 4. Hepatica. Gasteromycetes, 29 Pyrenomycetes, 29 Hymenomycetes, 29 Region II. CORMOPHYTA. Section 3. ACROBRYA. Cohort II. PROTOPHYTA. Class 8. Hydropterides. Cohort III. HYSTERO Class 6. Equiseta. Salviniaceæ, 71 Class 9. Selagines. Isoeteæ, 71 Class 10. Zamia. Section 4. AMPHIBRYA. Pontederaceæ, 206 Liliaceæ, 200 Class 16. Artorhiza. Dioscoreæ, 214 Class 17. Ensatæ. Bromeliaceae, 147 Class 18. Gynandræ. Orchidea, 173 Apostasiaceæ, 184 Class 19. Scitamineæ. Class 20. Fluviales. Class 21. Spadiciflora. Class 22. Principes. Cohort I.GYMNOSPERME. Class 23. Coniferæ. Abietinæ, 226 Section 5. ACRAMPHIBRYA. Class 35. Nuculiferæ. Labiata, 659 Verbenacea, 663 Class 38. Tubiflora. Class 37. Personata. Scrophualarineæ, 681 Gesneraceæ, 671 Class 38. Petalantha. Primulaceæ, 644 Class 39. Bicornes. Cohort IV. DIALYPE- Class 40. Discantha. Araliaceæ, 780 Ampelideæ, 439 Class 41. Corniculata. Crassulaceæ, 344 Class 42. Polycarpica. Class 43. Rhoades. Capparideæ, 357 Class 44. Nelumbia. Nymphæaceæ, 409 Class 45. Parietales. Malesherbiaceæ, 335 Class 46. Peponiferæ. Class 47. Opuntia. Class 48. Caryophyllineæ. Class 49. Columniferæ. Class 50. Guttiferæ. Dipterocarpeæ, 393 Class 51. Hesperides. Class 52. Acera. Acerinæ, 387 Sapindaceæ, 382 Class 53. Polygalinæ. Polygaleæ, 375 Class 54. Frangulaceœ. Pittosporeæ, 441 Class 55. Tricocca Empetres, 285 Class 56. Terebinthina. Juglandeæ, 292 Anacardiacea, 465 Burseraceæ, 459 Conuaraceæ, 468 Ochnaceae, 474 Class 57. Gruinales. Class 58. Calyciflora. Vochysiaceæ, 379 Class 59. Myrtiflora. Class 60. Rosiflora. Pomacea, 559 Calycantheæ, 540 Rosacea, 563 Amygdaleæ, 557 Chrysobalaneæ, 542 Class 61. Leguminosɛ. Papilionace, 544 Swartzieæ, 544 Mimoseæ, 544 1838. LINDLEY, John.-(Article "Exogens" in the Penny Cyclopedia.) In this place the author's views, as explained in previous works, were considerably modified so far as regards Exogens. He proposed in the first place to abandon altogether the old divisions of Polypetalous, Monopetalous, and Apetalous plants, and to reconstruct the whole fabric of Exogenous classification, upon the following principles: In the first place, the Orders whose embryo is furnished with an excessive quantity of albumen (a great physiological distinction), were formed into an Albuminous group. -The remainder of Exogens then consists of Orders in which some have the sexes in distinct flowers, and others hermaphrodite flowers. As we know of no character intimately connected with the reproduction of the species which is upon the whole so important as this, a Diclinous group was established, as had formerly been done by Jussieu.The hermaphrodite Örders were then separated into those with the calyx, corolla, and stamens confluent at the base with each other and with the ovary, that is, having an inferior ovary, and those in which those parts are distinct, either altogether or at least from each other, the former constituting an Epigynous group.- -Finally, the remainder of the Orders were divided into those with a monopetalous corolla combined with an ovary upon a binary plan (Dicarpous), and those which, if monopetalous, have the ovary simple or complex (Polycarpous). The following table will put this in a clearer point of view: Albumen extremely abundant; embryo minute Albumen absent, or in small quantity. Sexes in the same flower. Ovary inferior. Ovary superior. 1. ALBUMINOSÆ. 2. EPIGYNOSE. 3. POLYCARPOSE. 4. DICARPOSE. Each of these groups would form a series by itself, the sequence of which ought to be natural, and to exhibit various lateral analogies with other groups. And thus the three Monopetalous, Apetalous, and Polypetalous divisions were exchanged for five others founded upon totally different principles. It will be seen that this scheme has been partly adopted in the present volume. 1838. PERLEB, C. J.—(Clavis Classium ordinum et familiarum, atque Index generum regni vegetabilis. This author admits nine Classes, each of which is subdivided into 48 Orders, which are themselves the equivalents of Alliances, and under these are arranged 330 Natural Orders, which he calls Families. Professor Perleb states that most of the Alliances employed in this book were proposed by him in his work entitled Lehrbuch der Naturgeschichte des Pflanzenreichs, published in 1826, which I have not seen. The Clavis deserves to be studied. The Alliances are often well constructed, but not having the genera arranged under them, they are extremely troublesome to use; and this is no doubt the reason why the work has attracted so little notice among Botanists. Sir Edward Bromhead has analysed it (Mag. of Nat. Hist., new series, 1840, p. 329), and speaks of it as "a work of very great value." Professor Perleb's Classes are the following: 1839. LINDLEY, John.—(Botanical Register, p. 77, Miscellaneous Matter.) On this occasion the author directed his attention to an extension of the primary Classes of plants, which he proposed to raise to 8, in the following manner : To what extent these views can be sustained will be discovered in the present volume. 1839. BASKERVILLE, Thomas.-(Affinities of Plants, with some Observations upon Progressive Development.) The author of this tract was a very young man, with little experience; but he possessed strong perceptive powers, and would doubtless have distinguished himself had life been spared to him. But he died almost as soon as his little book saw the light. In the main he adopted the scheme of Orders in the Nixus Plantarum, p. xli. ; but he criticised that arrangement with some skill, and avoided many of its worst errors. Baskerville's main purpose was to establish a theory of progressive development in the Vegetable Kingdom, and to show by maps and other schemes all existing affinities. The following observations deserve to be quoted:— "Before we endeavour to establish any plan of affinity, it will be necessary to make a few observations upon a subject bearing closely upon that, namely, the respective rank or dignity of plants, and the means we possess of ascertaining the same. That this is no easy matter will appear when we reflect that imperfection is impossible in any work of supreme intelligence: our ideas of one plant having a station above that of another will not be drawn from any positive defect observable in the lowest, but from excellency we fancy to discover in the higher being. A Moss or Lichen is as perfectly fitted to the conditions it is intended to fulfil, and its organs as completely adapted to that purpose as the stately Palm, or magnificent forest tree. To imagine one plant, therefore, more noble than another, we merely imply that we consider its organisation, either by its complexity or some other character, to raise the plant possessing such qualifications above the surrounding species. When our investigations are confined to plants upon, or nearly upon, the same level, the problem is so intricate that it scarcely admits of solution; but when we take species separated by a long interval, the sum of additional properties enables us to decide with more certainty; yet the amount of difference is so trifling, and probably so exquisitely compensated for, that the balance is by no means so great as might be expected. In consequence of this it does not appear that any one has as yet been able to suggest what ought properly to be considered as the highest kind of plant; and the same difficulty would occur with regard to the lowest, were it not decided by the degree of proximity to the animal kingdom. "It will be seen, therefore, that this kind of study is essentially comparative, and our proper attainment of it dependent upon the extent of our acquaintance with the vegetable species and their organisation, and on a proper interpretation of the importance of the characters which we construct from these, which, as character scarcely ever maintains an equal value in all its relations, lays open another source of difficulty."—p. 39. 1841. TRAUTVETTER, Ernst Christian.-(De Novo Systemate Botanico.) This is a speculative disquisition upon the philosophical way of classing plants. The author begs that he may be understood to have executed his task not like a Botanist, but like a philosopher (non botanico sed philosophico munere perfungi). He divides the Vegetable Kingdom into semi-plants and true plants; the former into Favi or Acotyledons, and Trunculi or Monocotyledons; and the latter into Herbs and Trees. The views of the author cannot be given better than in his own words:-" Flagrant naturæ venatores nova semper et incognita visendi cupiditate. Nos vero antiquitatis alumni aliter sumus affecti." The treatise will be found in the Bulletin de la Société Impériale des Naturalistes de Moscou, 1841, p. 509. 1843. BRONGNIART, Adolphe.-(Enumération des Genres de Plantes cultivés au Muséum d'Histoire Naturelle de Paris, suivant l'Ordre établi dans l'école de Botanique en 1843). The apetalous division of Jussieu is abandoned on the ground that the Orders belonging to it are an imperfect state of polypetalous Orders, (called after Endlicher dialypetalous). The impracticability of a lineal natural arrangement is insisted upon. Rules are to be formed upon à posteriori not à priori considerations. Albumen is regarded of high value, especially the difference between farinaceous albumen, and that which is fleshy, oily, and horny, which last are taken to be slight modifications of each other. Finally, the direction of the embryo is regarded of more importance in its relation to the pericarp than to the hilum. The following are the details of the system :— Division 1. CRYPTOGAME. No sexual organs, &c. Branch 1. AMPHIGEN. No distinct axis or appendages, &c. Division 2. Branch 3. PHANEROGAME. Sexual organs evident, &c. Ser. 1. Albuminose. Albumen. Ser. 2. Exalbuminosæ. No albumen. |