same and the properties, only varying in degree, also the same, no one surely will deny that
such genera are unworthy of science and altogether misplaced in any system professing to aspire
to the character of natural.
It is surely time we were bidding adieu to such puerilities and studying, not how far we
can split and multiply genera by restricting our characters within the narrowest limits, but
how we may so construct them as to include every species that naturally belong to them, and
to exclude all that do not, a point of perfection which, I fear, we shall not soon attain, so long as
we use the varying shapes and sizes and duration of deciduous parts as generic characters and
talk of natural systems, but deny that either natural orders or natural genera come from the
hand of nature.
Influenced by these considerations, I reject all characters taken from the mere external form
of the calyx, whether nearly truncated or lobed, long or short, also whether the petals are so caducous
that they fall before expansion or fairly expand and prove as persistent as petals usually
are in tropical climates, that is, have a duration of from 12 to 24 hours. Such characters applied
to the distinction of genera, it appears to me, are well fitted to establish the truth of the axiom
that nature does not create genera, but at the same time indicates much want of philosophy in
our manner of interrogating nature and enquiring for natural genera, since such distinctions can
only produce the most artificial combinations of species.
But discarding them, and looking only to structure, not to size or relative permanency of
deciduous parts, we can approach more nearly to the construction of natural genera. The genus
Myrtus might then be confined to such species as have quinary flowers, a 3-Celled ovary, baccate
fruit, and several bony seed enclosing a somewhat cylindrical embryo. Myrcia to those having
quinary flowers, a 2-celled ovary, seed with a smooth not bony testa, and foliaceous corrugated
cotyledons. Jossinia to those'having quaternary flowers, a 2-celled ovary, numerous seeded
fruit, like Psidium or Myrtus, and foliaceous cotyledons.
Thus defined, these appear to be all good genera, but, not having materials to compare, I
can offer no decisive opinion on that point, though think it very desirable to ascertain whether a
genuine Myrtus ever has a quaternary flower and 2-celled ovary, or a Myrcia a quinary flower
and 3-celled ovary, for I think n o t: or would it not be better to class the species of these genera
according to characters taken altogether from the flower and ovary, even should they occasionally
be found somewhat arbitrary, because, as now defined by DeCandolle, it is impossible to
distinguish a Myrtus from a Myrcia without ripe seed, which, for practical purposes, is nearly
useless, we so seldom find fruit in that state in herbaria.
The genera Caryophyllus, Eugenia, Jambosa, Syzygium, and, I believe, Acmena D.C. all
associate in having a 2-celled ovary (ever 3 ?) with numerous ovules attached to the inner angles of
the cells, subdrupacious fruit, with few, generally one or two, globose fleshy seed, variously divided.
By subdrupacious, I here mean a fruit consisting of an exterior pulpy or fleshy portion,
sarcocarp, enclosing the seed, in this case not hard and bony, as in true drupes, but fleshy and
easily sectile. The testa of the seed is besides so very thin, that unless looked for, it may be
overlooked. The cotyledons or body of the seed is quite peculiar, altogether sui> generis. In
all, the radicle is small and inconspicuous with comparatively large seed lobes, these lobes being
sometimes conferruminate, that is adhering by their margins so as to appear one only, at others,
divided into two or three or a dozen lobes but all united in the minute central radicle.
The insufficiency of lobed or conferruminate seed to form a generic character is proved by
the fact of both forms being found on the same plant. In these structural peculiarities, which
pervade the whole tribe of Eugeniae we have, it appears to me, conclusive evidence that nature
does create genera and that this group, which presents nearly every variation of vegetable form
and inflorescence, being yet pervaded, through its whole extent, by a uniform structure in the
organs most essential to the preservation of the species, shows that it is truly one of nature’s own
genera and, as such, ought on no account to be broken down and frittered away by the introduction
of frivolous distinctions without practical value or facility of application when employed
in practice, since in their nature they are fluctuating and unstable.
The oldest name of the group of genera, which I propose uniting into one, is Caryophyllus,
and under that name the whole phalanx should be ranged, with the essential character—flowers
quaternary, ovary 2-celled, with numerous ovules attached to a centra 1 placenta, seed thick and
fleshy, variously lobed, sometimes conferruminate, the radicle usually minute and concealed between
the lobes. But, as nearly all of them have at different times been referred to Eugenia,
even Caryophyllus itself, I, to prevent further confusion, retain that name for the restored genus.
Adopting these characters for the genus I find that our Eugenia acris W. & A. and E. Pimc.nta,
D.C. do not belong to it, neither are they referable to Myrcia, but assuredly associate much
better with the latter than the former genus.
To some it may appear, that this is too sweeping a reform and that these extensive reductions
are neither required nor justified in the case to which they are applied. Should such an objection
be urged, I have only to reply that, the most sedulous examination has not shown me
how otherwise the difficulties I have indicated can be obviated, unless by the formation of additional
genera each as artificial as those I propose to reduce.
My first thought was to form new genera and I had actually prepared definitions for tw-o,
amply distinguished so far as paper distinctions were concerned, but which, when compared,
not with written characters but with their congeners, by laying the specimens side by side and
minutely comparing the whole in every part, marking the gradual transitions of external forms,
the uniformity of internal structure, in the organs of fructification, and finally the general uniformity
of habit, I saw no alternative but to proceed as I have done and at once reunite the
species, now distributed under Eugenia, Caryophyllus, Jambosa, Syzygium and Acmena into
one vast genus. The correctness of this view I shall endeavour to establish by, in the first instance,
presenting here a synoptical arrangement of nearly all the Indian species of the tribe
Myrteae with which I am acquainted, and afterwards largely illustrating the genus Eugenia by
devoting many plates to its elucidation in my leones.
The characters I have assigned to the genera are brief but comprehensive, being anxious
to avoid the introduction of any terms not absolutely required or in any way tending to
exclude by unnecessary refinement, any species that really belong to them.
Of the following genera Eugenia is by far the largest, exceeding in the number of its species
all the others put together, and as its species present among themselves a considerable variety
of form, it became absolutely necessary to distribute them into sections or sub-genera to facilitate
the determination of the species. The plan I have adopted for this purpose aims at keeping
together, as much as possible, the species referred by DeCandolle and others to the several
genera I have reduced. By this means comparatively little inconvenience will be caused as each
sub-genus retains the name it bore as a genus. The characters of these sub genera are necessarily
somewhat arbitrary and, on a few occasions, scarcely applicable to some of the species
referred to them. This however is unavoidable in a genus so natural, and it is hoped, will not
be objected to as figures of all such will be given in the leones. The characters of the subgenera
are almost entirely taken from variations of the calyx, which are always obvious,
aided by the inflorescence which is equally prominent. Two of these sub-genera are
again divided into sections by the inflorescence being terminal or lateral. This last
character, though in common use, I have found of difficult application in practice and
very liable to mislead unless restricted by definite rules. These I have endeavoured to supply
by considering all those lateral which spring from old wood, such for example, as from the ramuli
of previous years or naked branches from the scars of fallen leaves : while those arising from
young leafy shoots of the same season and forming a terminal corymbus, though all axillary I
have considered terminal. By adhering to this rule I have in one or two instances referred specimens
with terminal cymes to lateral sections, because the peduncles really rose from old wood
and were only accidentally terminal,through the abortion of the shoot of the current season, which
was proved by other instances where it was produced. Thus limited I have found this a good
character as indicating a marked peculiarity of habit.
The great number of species referable to the sub-genus Syzygium rendering a further division
necessary, I then had recourse to the petals, grouping those with cohering petals in one
section and those with free expanding ones in another. This I at first expected to find a character
of easy application, but in practice was disappointed, as both, not very rarely, occur in the
same plant. All but one of those referred to the latter section have most unequivocally the habit
of Syzygium but with the free expanding petals of Jambosa and easily form the transition to that
genus.