At the bottom of the sea there is a very curious zoophyte, the _actinium_, or sea-anemone. For a long time this creature was confounded with the plants, and held to be an ocean flower. Those who admire the beautiful, bright-coloured actinia, in the Garden of Acclimatization, in Paris, who look at them, waving on their flexible stem, shaking the coloured appendages and fringes which adorn their heads, find it hard to regard these charming queens of the waters otherwise than as real flowers. And, in fact, for ages, the _sea-anemones_ were held to be marine plants.
In the last century, coral was held to be a marine shrub, and it was even believed that the flowers of the coral had been discovered. An academician of Paris, Count de Marsigli, created a European reputation for himself by this supposed discovery. Peyssonnel, a Provençal naturalist, found the utmost difficulty in opposing this idea, and in establishing the fact that these supposed flowers of the coral were in reality young corals. He had the whole Academy of Sciences against him; and his opposition to the ideas of the Academy brought him into such disgrace, that he was obliged to leave France and to go to the Antilles, where he died in obscurity as a doctor of medicine. And all this because he maintained that coral is not a plant, and does not produce flowers!
The famous Genevese naturalist, Charles Bonnet, anticipating the knowledge of our day by more than a century, has given a most interesting form to the parallel between animals and plants, in his work entitled _Contemplation de la Nature_. We cannot resist the pleasure of quoting the following passage, in which Charles Bonnet shows in a striking manner what are the difficulties in the way of distinguishing the plant from the animal, and how those difficulties are disposed of by those who dispute the sensibility of plants:--
"Everything is graduated in nature," says Charles Bonnet, "and, in refusing to admit that plants are sentient, we force nature to make a jump without any assignable reason.
"We observe that feeling decreases by degrees from man to the nettle, and to the mussel, and we persuade ourselves that it stops there, because we regard these animals as the least perfect. But there are, perhaps, many degrees between the feeling of the mole and of the plant. There are, perhaps, still more between the most and the least sensible of the plants. The gradations, which we observe, ought to persuade us to this philosophy; the new beauty which it adds to the system of the world, and the pleasure to be derived from the multiplication of sentient creatures ought to contribute to induce us to admit it. I willingly admit that this philosophy is much to my taste. I love to think that those flowers which adorn our fields and our gardens with a brightness constantly renewed, those fruit trees which are so pleasant to our eyes and our palate; those majestic trees that compose the vast forests, which time seems to have respected, are so many sentient creatures partaking after their fashion in the sweetness of existence.