| XXX | (651) | XXX |
B O T with certainty what changes the young feeds mayundergo, what injury they may fuffer, by prematurely forcing open their petals and cutting off the ftamina. If a pregnant animal be wounded, and in a part too intimately connetted with the foetus, what reafon have we to hope for a beautiful or well-proportioned offspring ? One thing however is certain, that if the office of the ftamina, as is alledged by the oppofers of the fexes, be to feparate and carry off noxious or excrementitious matter from the fruit, the retention of this matter would of itfelf introduce a change into the colour of the future plant; becaufe in that cafe the feeds would not be properly purged or rettified, being prematurely deprived of the veffels deftined for that purpofe. We (hall now examine the famous ftory of Baal the gardner at Brentford, related above in the hiftofical view of the controverfy. Linnaeus accufes Baal’s judges of ignorance, becaufe they convitted him of fraud. But, would not any judge fmile to hear himfelf branded with ignorance, or a partial adminiftration of juftice, merely becaufe he paid no regard to the fexual commerce of plants in his decifions ? It is happy for mankind that judges are ’obliged to decide according to law or equity, and not according to the hypothetical whims of the naturalift.—But, even fuppofing Baal’s judges to have had a perfett knowledge of the fexual commerce of vegetables, and to have been at full liberty to determine the point of law upon that medium, if they had acquitted Baal of fraud, or at leaft of negligence, we ffiould have been inclined to doubt both of their integrity and ingenuity.—It is acknowledged, that great quantities both of the braffica llorida and braffica longifolia were raifed that feafon in Baal’s garden. A feedfman or gardner, in packing up many parcels of different feeds, by the Ample error of putting a wrong mark upon, any of the parcels, would produce a miftake fimilar to this of Baal’s. But, whether the circumftance. took its rife from negligence or fraud, belongs not to our prefem inquiry. Even up<5n Linnaeus’s own principles, it is far from being clear of abfurdity, how, by a cafual impregnation, could nay, be entirely For, bythethefpecies analogyofofa allplantanimals, takingchanged. our analogy from Linnaeus’s vegetable mules, this fortuitous impregnation ffiould have only produced a mule, or mixture of the two fpecies, and not a perfett metamorphofis of either. Hence it may be fairly concluded, that this famous ftory, upon which the fexualifts lay fo much ftrefs, inftead of ftrengthening, tends to the final deftruttion of that hypothefis in fapport of which it was originally adduced.’ ' Of a fimilar nature is the ftory contained in Mylius’s Ifetter to Dr Watfon. This gentleman writes to his correfpondent, “ that a female palm, tree grew many years in the garden belonging to the Royal Academy at Berlih, without producing any ripe or fertile fruit; that a male, branch, with its flowers in full blow, was brought from Leipfic, which is about twenty German miles from Berlin, and . fufpended over the female; the refult of this operation was, that the female, that very year, produced Foo ripe and fertile fruit. The fame experiment being repeated the following year, 2000 ripe fruit were pro-
A N Y. 6s z dueed.” — Not to call Mylius’s veracity in queftien, we ffiall allow the fatt to be as he has related it: Neverthelefs it is far from being fatisfattory. Berlin is not the native climate of palm-trees. Mylius informs us, that this palm bore flowers and fruit for thirty years before the experiment was tried ; but the fruit never came to full maturity. Now it is well known, that many exotic plants, particularly thole of the larger kinds,, feldom produce ripe fruit in a climate which is^ not adapted by nature for their nourifhment, unlefs they are aflifted by artificial culture, and have grown in that climate for a great number of years. Mylius’s palm-tree had carried unripe fruit for the fpace of thirty years. Now, according to the ufual courfe of exotics, it is natural to think that, during all this time, the fruit was every feafon making gradual advances towards perfettion r It might fo fall out, then, that at the very feafon when the male branch was fufpended over the female, the plant had arrived at the higheft degree of perfettion it could ever acquire in the climate of Berlin; and of courfe, the accidental circumftance of fufpending the male, branch over it, at this critical period, might give rife to the deception of attributing the perfettion and fertilization of the fruit to the prefence of the male branch. The circumftance of the tree’s bringing forth only 100 ripe fruit the firft year, and 2000 the fecond, remarkably favours this account of the matter. However, be tins a? it will, the experiment is fo very defettive, that no conclufion can be drawn from it either for or againit the fexual hypothefis. To convince any thinking perfon, that the fertility of this tree was folely owing to fome impregnating virtue derived to it from the male branch, a branch ffiould have been fufpended over, the female one year, omitted the next, and fo on alternately for a courfe of years, or (as Linnteus would exprefs it), giving her a hufband one year, and depriving her of that gratification the next: After treating thefemale in this • manner for feveral years, if■ it had uniformly happened, that the fruit was fertile every year' the male branch was fufpended over it, and. unfertile every year that the fufpenfion of the male branch was omitted, then indeed there would have been a foundation for'concluding, that there was fome connettion between the fertility of the fruit and the prefence of the male branch. But as this neceffary ftep has, been negletted, the experiment is incomplete, and the conclufion drawn from it uncandid and precipitate.. We cannot conclude our remarks on this theory, without hazarding a few-obfervations on the truly miraculous , effetts Linnaeus afcribes wind; and In accounting for which the impregnation of all tothethedioicous moft of the hermaphrodite plants, recourfe is. conftantly had to the wind, which is faid to convey the pollen of the male to the ftigmata of the female. When the female again, is at fuch a diftance as to render the carriage of the pollen fufprcious or impoffible', our author is not difcouraged by this circumftance, but confidently affirms, that Lome infett has-been rummaging amongft the ftamina of the male, carries off a quantity of the pollen adhering to its legs, and, unconfcious of its precious load, flies from” flower to flower till it arrives at the unmarried female,: where.
