the shelf of stigma above, not when the bee leaves the flower, but when it repeats the action. 8. The remarkable conclusion to which we are brought seems to be this. These flowers are so constructed that the pollen, however near the stigma, is somehow prevented from reaching it of itself, and then honey and other allurements are provided to tempt insects to come and convey the pollen to the stigma. And the various contrivances for hindering the pollen from reaching the stigma directly are excelled only by those for having it done in a roundabout way. So nature appears to place obstacles in the way, and then to overcome the difficulty of her own making by calling in the aid of insects. 9. The solution of this puzzle is simple enough when once hit upon, although it has taken a long time to find it out. It not only makes everything plain as respects ali these flowers, but also, as a true discovery should, clears up and explains a great many things besides. The explanation is, that cross-fertilization is aimed at. The pollen was not intended to fertilize that same flower, but to be conveyed to some other flower of the same species. 10. So insects, which had seemed to be needful only when the stamens and pistils are in separate flowers or on separate plants, are quite as needful—indeed, are more needful where these organs stand side by side in the same blossom. The reason why crossing is advantageous, and in the long run necessary, is because it has been found that those flowers which are fertilized by stamens growing in other flowers of their kind set more vigorous seed than such as are fertilized by their own stamens. 11. The reciprocity of flower and flower, and of insects and flowers, is something admirable. Insects pay liberal 50 CATS, Mice, humble-bees, and CLOVER, wages for the food which flowers provide for them. This mutual relation is illustrated in a striking and peculiar manner in the case of the butterflies and moths. Butterflies and moths were once caterpillars, and caterpillars are the especial enemies of plants. Sometimes they kill them; and if they do not quite kill them by eating all their leaves, they often prevent them from bearing fruit. When, however, the caterpillar changes from chrysalis to butterfly or moth, it becomes a winged pollen-bearer, and the zealous friend of many plants. ASA GRAY. Adapted. 20.-CATS. MICE, HUMBLE-BEES, AND CLOVER. cred'i-ble, within belief. ex-ot'ic, foreign. ex-tinct', extinguished. fè'line, of the cat kind. or-chi-da'ceous [or-ki-dā'shus], relating to plants of the orchis kind. 1. PLANTS and animals, most remote in the scale of nature, are bound together by a web of complex relations. The exotic lobelia fulgens, in certain parts of England, is never visited by insects, and consequently, from its peculiar structure, never can set a seed. 2. Many of our orchidaceous plants absolutely require the visits of moths to remove their pollen-masses and thus to fertilize them. I have, also, reason to believe that humble-bees are indispensable to the fertilization of the heart's-ease, for other bees do not visit this flower. 3. From experiments which I have lately tried I have found that the visits of bees are necessary for the fertilization of some kinds of clover. For instance, twenty heads of Dutch clover yielded 2290 seeds, but twenty other heads protected from bees produced not one. Again, a hundred heads of red clover produced 2700 seeds, but the same number of protected heads produced not a single seed. 4. Humble-bees alone visit red clover, as other bees cannot reach the nectar. Hence I have very little doubt, that if the whole genus of humble-bees became extinct or very rare in England, the heart's-ease and red clover would become very rare, or wholly disappear. The number of humble-bees in any district depends in a great degree on the number of field-mice, which destroy their combs and nests. More than two thirds of them are thus destroyed all over England. 5. Now the number of mice is largely dependent, as every one knows, on the number of cats; and near villages and small towns the nests of humble-bees are more numerous than elsewhere, which I attribute to the number of cats that destroy the mice. Hence it is quite credible that the presence of a feline animal in large numbers in a district might determine, through the intervention first of mice and then of bees, the frequency of certain flowers in that district. 1. WHY does not every one who can afford it have a geranium in his window or some other flower? It is very cheap; its cheapness is next to nothing, if you raise it from seed, or from a slip; and it is a beauty and a companion. It sweetens the air, rejoices the eye, links you with nature and innocence, and is something to love. And if it cannot love you in return, it cannot hate you; it caunot utter a hateful thing even for your neglecting it; for, though it is all beauty, it has no vanity; and such being the case, and living as it does purely to do you good and afford pleasure, how will you be able to neglect it? 2. But, pray, if you choose a geranium, or possess but a few of them, let us persuade you to choose the scarlet kind, the "old original" geranium, and not a variety of it, not one of the numerous diversities of red and white, blue and white, ivy-leaved, etc. Those are all beautiful, and very fit to vary a large collection; but to prefer them to the originals of the race is to run the hazard of preferring the curious to the beautiful, and costliness to sound taste. 3. It may be taken as a good general rule that the most popular plants are the best; for otherwise they would not have become such. And what the painters call “pure colors" are preferable to mixed ones, for reasons which Nature herself has given when she painted the sky of one color, and the fields of another, and divided the rainbow itself into a few distinct colors, and made the red rose the queen of flowers. 4. Every thing is handsome about the geranium, not excepting its name; which cannot be said of all flowers, though we get to love ugly words when associated with pleasing ideas. The word "geranium" is soft and pleasant; the meaning is poor, for it comes from a Greek word which signifies a crane, the fruit having the form of a crane's head or bill. Cranes-bill is the English name for geranium, though the learned appellation has superseded the vernacular. But what a reason for naming a flower! as if the fruit were anything in comparison, or any one Icared about it. 5. Such distinctions, it is true, are useful to botanists; but as a plenty of learned names are sure to be reserved for the freemasonry of the science, it would be well for the world at large to invent joyous and beautiful names for these images of joy and beauty. In some instances we have them; such as heart's-ease, honeysuckle, marigold, mignonette (little darling), daisy (day's eye), etc. And many flowers are so lovely, and have associated names otherwise unmeaning so pleasantly with one's memory, that no new ones would sound so well, or seem even to have such proper significations. 6. In pronouncing the words lilies, roses, tulips, pinks, jonquils, we see the things themselves, and seem to taste all their beauty and sweetness. Pink is a harsh, petty word in itself, and yet assuredly it does not seem so; for in the word we have the flower. It would be difficult to persuade ourselves that the word rose is not very beautiful. Pea is a poor, Chinese-like monosyllable; and brier is rough and fierce, as it ought to be; but when we think of sweet-pea and sweet-brier, the words appear quite worthy of their epithets. The poor monosyllable becomes rich in sweetness and appropriation; the rough dissyllable also, and the sweeter for its contrast. 7. The names of flowers, in general, among the polite, are neither pretty in themselves, nor give us information. The country people are apt to do them more justice. Goldylocks, ladies'-fingers, rose-a-ruby, shepherd's-clock, shepherd's-purse, sauce-alone, scarlet-runners, sops-in-wine, sweet-william, etc., give us some ideas, either useful or pleasant. But from the peasantry come many uncongenial names, as bad as those of the botanist. It is a pity that all fruits and flowers, and animals too except those with |