Others will say how absurd the idea is, when you cannot show the place to which the impregnating influence is to be applied. But the consideration of mosses does away with this objection partly, and that of Anthoceros, entirely; because in mosses, the ovule, or pre-existing cell, ready to receive the male influence becomes an empty cell, terminating the seta; and the sporula become developed at its opposite end, the first growth appearing to be quite unconnected with that of the future reproductive organs: and in Anthoceros there is no fixed punctum ready for the application of the male organs, but these have to form a communication with the lower, or inferior cellular tissue of the frond, before even the growth of seta can commence.
Besides a case in point exists in Viscum, or Loranthus, in which no point is ready prepared for the reception of the male influence; showing how universal the law is, that in no one point or place is there an absolute want of gradation.
As in mosses the influence of the male disregarding the ovule, is thrown into the development of the seta, and then of the theca at the apex of this; there can be no conclusive reason why in ferns the same influence should be thrown into the development of the frond, and then into that of the theca.
While Anthoceros proves that in these orders the male influence may exert its effects upon any point.
As there is no styliform production in Anthoceros, so there is none in ferns. If the ramenta be anthers, they will not be dubious ones, because as they remain fixed, people cannot say, that possibly they are also reproductive bodies, which by the bye is no objection at all, after instances of anthers bearing ovules instead of pollen!
Why the peculiar distribution of the male influence (on which we determine our genera,) takes place, is another question, and one that cannot be fairly asked?
Why it is confined to the under surface perhaps can, it being a law that in all cases it is the under surface of the leaf, or its modification, from which new growths originate, and as nature has closed indusia, how could the under surface be interior if this rule were not regularly adhered to?
That the indusium is a special organ, i.e. not an eruption of the cuticle, I am sure; hence it is essential to examine extensively both indusiate and other forms, the precise extension of their veins, etc. at an early period to ascertain if their most diversified situations cannot be reduced to some one type.
Query. Is the gyrate vernation of any ferns comparable to the form of certain shells, to which (at least Mollusca) ferns are supposed to be analogous.
Memo. To ascertain the most peculiar, and most universal points of Mollusca and Pseudo cotyledonea, it is in this way that we may hope to extend our views. Some there are indeed who, while the whole course of their studies has been to neglect structure, deny the applicability of presumptive evidence in favour of doctrines, the subjects of which are barely susceptible of direct proof. Thus Greville and Arnott, angrily ask, what do persons mean by saying that mosses have pistilla, etc.? they protest against such community of application in the use of terms. Many more deny sexuality because it has not been proved. Considering the invisible nature of the fluid of the anthers of mosses, etc. how do they expect that we are to demonstrate its application to the pistil, and the subsequent steps? As well might they doubt the necessity of the application of the boyau to an ovule, (or the existence of the boyau itself,) because the derivation of the embryo cannot be proved.