
 
        
         
		calyx.  In feveral other fpecies,  he obferved the fmall  veffels  or  capfules contained  in the  fwollen  and  
 diftended  fummits  o f  the  leaves;  but not the fmalleft appearance  of  thofe  threads or fuppofed  Horal  
 parts.  In  others  again,  thefe  lall were  very vifible,  irithout the former:  for  inftance,' the  Fucos  no-  
 dofus  and  Fucus canaliculatus  exhibited  very diftinaiy  their  feed-veffels,  but  were  entirely  deftitute  
 o f  the  filaments.  Our author  therefore  takes  it  for granted,  that the  plants  were  not examined at tlic  
 time  o f  their  flowering.— Again,  in  the  Fucos  palmatus,  he found  the furface in a manner covered  
 with  thofe minute  clufters  o f  hairs  or  flowers,'  obfervable  in  the  Fucus  veficulofus:  but,  after  the  
 moft acute  infpeSion,  he  was not able to  trace  out any refeinblancc  to  feeds  or capfules. 
 Balter  and  Gmelin  have already fliown  that the theory  o f  Reaumur  is  evidently  expofcd  to  the  
 following objeftions. 
 Firft.  That as  the  fine  capillary  filaments were  always  deftitute  o f  the  antheras,  they  could  not  be  
 confidered as  the flowers. 
 Secondly.  That as  the  furface  o f  the  frons  was,  in  fome  fpecies,  perfeSiy entire,  without  having  
 the  fmalleft  appearance  o f  thofe  filaments,  and  yet  abounded  with  the  granulated  veffels  or  feeds;  
 while others  again  difcovered not the leaft  figus  of any grains  or capfules,  and yet were overfpread on  
 every  part with  the fafcicles  o f  flowers— it  fliould  follow,  that the  parts  in  queftion,  are,  witli  refpeB  
 to  the  fyftem,  entirely  independent  o f  each  other.' 
 ■ But  a  more  ftriking and  convincing proof  o f  this  being  the  fa8,  and which  it was  hardly  poffible  
 could have  efcaped  the  obfervation  of  Reaumur,  is,  that thofe  filaments,  contrary  to  the  very  nature  
 and property o f  the  ftate  o f  florefcence,  are diftinaiy  feen  on  the  furface  o f  the  plant,  in  its  earlieft  
 and moft tender ftate,  when  it  is  fo  e.xtremely fmall  as  hardly to have attained its natural  form.  They  
 are  alfo  equally vifible,  when the diftended fummits  are  in  a  final  ftate  o f  decay:  and during the  fucceflive  
 periods,  thefe  fmall  filaments  do  not  undergo any  vifible kind  o f  change.  Since then, 
 they  are  deftitute  o f  thofe  parts,  which  conftitutc  the  effential  properties  o f  the  flower;  fmce  
 they  are  fo  evidently  repugnant  to  every  principle  o f   analogy:  fome  other  ufe,  in  conformity  
 to the  ftrufiure  o f  the  plant,  muft  be  affigned  to  them.  And from  the experiment  noticed  above,  
 and  originally  made  by  Reaumur;  they may,  with much more probability,  be  confidered  either  as  
 fecretory  duHs,  or  as  veffels  defigned  for conveying  nourilhment  to  the  frons.  And  thus  Nature  
 may  compenfate  for the want  o f  that  fupply,  which  land plants,  by means  o f  their porous  radicles,  
 extraa  from the foil  in which  they are immoveably  fixed;  while the roots  of  the  former,  feem calculated  
 merely  to  countcraS  the  fluauating  ftate,  to which  they are inceffaiitly expofed. 
 Hence we may obferve  the  Wifdom  o f  Providence  furnilhing  to  the  different  kinds  o f  vegetables,  
 properties  adapted  to  their  different  fituations.  And while we  furvey  the  great  divcrfity in the form,  
 fize,  and  fituation  o f  feeds,  in  the vegetable produaions  o f  the Earth  ;  we  cannot  fail to remark  the  
 general  uniformity,  in point of fituation,  as well  as fimilarity  o f  form  and  fize,  in  the  organs  ofpro- 
 6  l » . d d i , : . „ , o  .h e r .  ¡ . „ k « „ o . b e . „ i u , d ,   , h „ L i „ c u , ,   in   h i i  o . s  o d i . i o ..  o f   ,l,c   G . « . , s   ,„ b l ii l .c d   b . f „ c   aW - 
 l e r  m ,d b  h is o b jb a .b iis   lo   R t s b m a r ,  b . d  f to w n   b is  s . , n i  o f   c o n f id e n «   in   ih c  .B b riio h s   o f   i b .i   o b ilio r,  s o lsiin g   ,|,o  „ . i .   j „ „ . ,   b y  f o b i o i n i,»  to   
 liis tie fin iiio n   h is   u fu a l  figii  o f   d o u b lin g . 
 pagation 
 pagation  throughout this  extenfive  part of  the  algas.  In  many  of  the  fucufes,  the feeds  ot  capfules  
 are  found  fixed  in  the  fubilance o f  the  leaf  or  frons.  And  in  others  of  a more  filiform ftru£lurc,  as  
 alfo,  in many o f  the  confervas,  they  are  imbedded  in the  diftended  fummits  of  the  pínnulas  on  the  
 fides  and  at  the  extremities  of  the frons; ®  or  in  fmall  axillary  globules  formed at  the  bafe  of  the  
 finer branchlets.’ 
 In  as  much  then as  relates  to  the  produ6lion,  fituation,  and  habit o f  thefe minute  grains  or  feeds,  
 the  fucus  and  conferva do  not feem to  differ. 
 It  is  not  unufual  to  obferve in the fame  fpecimen,  by  the  alfiflance o f  a microfcope,  many  o f  the  
 opaque  grains  diftin£lly  formed  and conglomerated together,  beneath  the  furface o f  the  frons;  while  
 in other branches,  a  faint cloudy  appearance  is the  only  lign,  which  marks  an  approaching tendency  
 to the  fame ftate o f maturity.  I f  any  florefcence  preceded the  frudlification  o f  thefe  plants,  it  might  
 be  fought  for  in  fimilar inftances;  yet not  the  fmalleft appearance,  which could  in  reality juftify  this  
 generally received hypothefis,  is  to be  found. 
 It  is  worthy  o f  notice,  that  Reaumur  had not been  able  to  difcover  thefe floral  parts,  on more  
 than five or  fix fpecies,  throughout the very numerous  genus o f  the  fucus:  and  yet,  circumfcribed as  
 his  theory  undoubtedly  is,  and  unfounded as  it appears  to be,  the  generic  charafter of  thofe  plants  
 has  long been  eilabliflied upon  it .'  It was not probable,  that  Linneus  fhould  have  negleiled  to  
 avail  himfelf  o f  a difcovery,  fo favourable to  his  fyftem,  and  under  the  fanftion  o f   that  refpedtable  
 author.® 
 C  From 
 6  As for inftance,  Fuccs  fpinofus—F.  obtufus—F.  cariilagineus—F.  pinnatifidus.—Co.nferva  polymorpha,  &c.  &c. 
 The principle on which the remark is founded remains  the fame;  whether the fniflifications may be contained within  the  fwollen fummits  of  fome  
 fpecies,  or in the globular excrefccnces,  and diftended pínnulas of others. 
 7  Focus  coccineus Hudfoni—Conìervaplumofa—C.  nodulofa,  ¿  
 be formed by a diftention of  the medullary fubftance of  the  plants. 
 The globules, in which thefe grains arc fixed, appear under diffciftjan tc 
 8  “ FUCUS  *  Rcaum.  A.  G.  1711.  T.  9,  10,  t i. 
 Mafadijiores? 
 Veficuls: glabrs cavre pilis intus adfperfrc. 
 RemindJlorti. 
 Veficulie glabri,  gelatina rcpletie,  adfpcrfm punUis pcrforatis femine fcctis.” 
 Linn.  Gen.  PI.  Holmirc.  J764. 
 “ FUCUS. MASC.  villis imertexii 
 FEM.  Vefitula: adfpetfx grants immerfis apice prominulis.” 
 Hudfon—Lightfoot.  &c. 
 Ill  an  edition of  the  Syft.  Nat.  not long fince publifhed,  the generic charailer of  the  fucus  appears  to be eftablifhcd on more probable grounds. 
 “ FUCUS—GWii/t carpomorphi vcl_/irainagraniformia puntìis pcrforatis latcntia.”   Syft.  Nat.  Edit.  Grael. 
 The fubdivifionshowever of  the fpecies,  which the Editor of  this work has taken  from  Gmelin’s  History  of  the  Fucuses,  feem,  in  fomc  
 inftances  10 require correftion.— See  Note  13.  &c. 
 9  This hypothefis may have derived additional weight from a reference,  which has been made in favour of  it,  by fo great an  authority as Baftcr,+  
 to the well-known work of Marfigli  (Histoire  PKYSjquE  de  la  Mer.  p.  160.);  in which we find a very circumftantial defcription of  amarine  
 plant in perfcU flower,  accompanied with an accurate engraving of  its various parts.  Marfigii obferves,  (hat it was difcovered oppofiic 1 promon- 
 +  Baft.  Opufc.  Subs.  Tom.  2.  p.  iso.—Seethe reference  of Baftcr,  in  the  Latin ti