281

but subsequent investigation
[convinced?] me I was wrong.

In the last part of paragraph
[162?] on page [130?] the statement
referring to [medullary?] [?]
[?] does not seem as
strong as it might be. [It?]
[seems?] to me that the [?]
[annuals?] of [Coniferae?] are [?]
normally forward and are
as distinct in the [medullary?]
[?] as they are in the
longitudinal tissue, and
are not (or very [poorly?]) due
to a [?] change of
direction.

[?] [?] [?] [?] [?]
in the [?] of [?]
of the nature of intercellular
spaces?

Figure 54 was not drawn
[Page Break]
from a specimen [distended?]
by water. When weak acids or
water was used the specimen
[assumed?] much the appearance
of Fig. 21, as I have a drawing
in my [?] to show.

There is probably no need
of mentioning the plants
I have received [?] examining
the work. It more than [?]
any expectations. The engraving
of my drawings is on the whole
good, and even better than I
had anticipated: [?] [?]
gratified with the style of
the [?] [??].

My classes begin this week
Thursday. The [?] class
I shall teach entirely by
lectures. Should [?] like