281

but subsequent investigation
[?] me I was wrong.

In the last part of paragraph
[163?] on page [130?] the statement
referring to [?] [?]
[?] does not seem as
strong as it might be. [It?]
[seems?] to me that the [?]
[?] of [Coniferae?] are [?]
normally forward and are
as distinct in the [?]
[?] 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. [?] work [?] or
water was used the specimen
[?] much the appearance
of Fig. 21, and [?] a [?]
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

but subsequent investigation
[?] me I was wrong.

In the last part of paragraph
[163?] on page [130?] the statement
referring to [?] [?]
[?] does not seem as
strong as it might be. [It?]
[seems?] to me that the [?]
[?] of [Coniferae?] are [?]
normally forward and are
as distinct in the [?]
[?] 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