Page:Transactions of the Linnean Society of London, Volume 12.djvu/106

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
78
Mr. Brown's Observations on the

branches; but in other cases, where they are equally distinct at the base of the tube, this supposition cannot be admitted. A monopetalous corolla not splitting at the base is necessarily connected with this structure, which seems also peculiarly well adapted to the dense inflorescence of Compositæ; the vessels of the corolla and stamina being united and so disposed as to be least liable to suffer by pressure."

At the date of this publication I certainly had no knowledge of any similar observations having been previously made: but I now see in M. Cuvier's account of the proceedings of the Institute of France for 1815, that M. Cassini is considered as having anticipated me on this subject, and as he says in "termes non équivoques." What these terms are, appears by a letter I have received from M. Cassini himself, in which he states his claim to rest on the following passage:

"Chaque fleur hermaphrodite ou male contient cinq étamines, correspondant aux cinq nervures de la Corolle et par conséquent alternes avec ses lobes."

This passage occurs in a Memoir on the Stamina of Compositæ, which was read to the Institute of France in July 1813, and first appeared with the substance of that Memoir in the Journal de Physique, said to be for April 1814; but the actual date of the publication of which I have reason to believe was somewhat later, and very nearly corresponding with that at which M. de Jussieu was in possession of a copy of my essay containing the observations already quoted. I conclude it is not supposed I could have been acquainted with the passage in the original memoir, unless the report usually made on memoirs read to the Institute should have been printed, and should have actually noticed this passage or the discovery it is now said to contain.

But independently of the near equality of dates, I cannot con-

sider