e same thing occurs precisely, with this
difference, that the _capita_ of the ramenta are highly developed; and
still more, that the terminations of each pinnula of the young frond, are
mere scales without a terminal _head_.

So that almost all the scales of the under surface of the lobes of the
mature frond, are mere scales. The peculiar ramenta are to be looked for
along the insertion of each pinna, and along the rachis, in which all
have the peculiar structure.

At the time that these scales are commencing their development, the
peculiar ones are at the age of mature perfection, so far as function
goes. No one can look at a young pinnula at this epoch and observe the
evident capitation of each ramentum, the inflexion of its apex, so that
the head is brought into contact with the frond, without suspecting that
they have the same relation of _cause_ to the appearance subsequently of
the thecae or capsules. It is curious that the colour of the scales is
the same as that of the ramenta, in which the colour is developed from
above _downwards_, a peculiarity as it appears to me.

The frond of Ceterach is very frondose-looking, it has stomata on its
under surface, and the cells of the cuticle very sinuate. There can be
no doubt of the propriety of including the nature of these ramenta and
scales in its generic character.

I can see nothing peculiar in the situation of the scales or ramenta to
suggest the reason of the situation of the capsules.

In several cases, each pinna appears to have scales only which become
barren lobes? the scales and ramenta have the same imbricate situation.
In this country it will be useless to expect more proofs. But the four
genera alluded to afford evidence enough, and sufficient to show that
these ramenta are formed with reference to some important function, that
their universality is incompatible with any functions of such minor
degree as are attributed to them by those who represent them to be scales
or hairs.

To those who require proof of the existence of the complex male organ of
Phaenogams, or of a male of that form with which only they are familiar,
I do not address myself; but to the philosophic botanist, who expects to
meet with in the lower orders of plants, a lower organization, one with a
tendency of reduction to the essential elements, and who bears in mind
the comparative anatomy and structure of similar bodies in adjoining, or
not very distant groups, I beg leave to