« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »
albuminous Dicotyledons the cotyledons act as the absorbents of the reserve-food of the seed and are commonly brought above ground (epigeal), either withdrawn from the seed-coat or carrying it upon them, and then they serve as the first green organs of the plant. The part of the stem below the cotyledons (hypocotyl) commonly plays the greater part in bringing this about. Exalbuminous Dicotyledons usually store reserve-food in their cotyledons, which may in germination remain below ground (hypogeal). In albuminous Monocotyledons the cotyledon itself, probably in consequence of its terminal position, is commonly the agent by which the embryo is thrust out of the seed, and it may function solely as a feeder, its extremity developing as a sucker through which the endosperm is absorbed, or it may
become the first green organ, the terminal sucker dropping
off with the seed-coat when the endosperm is exhausted. Exalbuminous Monocotyledons are either hydrophytes or strongly hygrophilous plants and have often peculiar features in germination. Distribution by seed appears to satisfy sowell the requirements of Angiosperms that distribution by vegetative buds is only an occasional process. At the same time every bud on a
£" shoot has the capacity to form a new plant if placed *ction. in suitable conditions, as the horticultural practice
of propagation by cuttings shows; in nature we see plants spreading by the rooting of their shoots, and buds we know may be freely formed not only on stems but on leaves and on roots. Where detachable buds are produced, which can be transported through the air to a distance, each of them is an incipient shoot which may have a root, and there is always reserve-food stored in some part of it. In essentials such a bud resembles a seed. A relation between such vegetative distribution buds and production of flower is usually marked. Where there is free formation of buds there is little flower and commonly no seed, and the converse is also the case. Viviparous plants are an illustration of substitution of vegetative buds for flower. The position of Angiosperms as the highest plant-group is unassailable, but of the point or points of their origin from the general stem of the plant kingdom, and of the path :* or paths of their evolution, we can as yet say little. *onomy. Until well on in the Mesozoic period geological history tells us nothing about Angiosperms, and then only by their vegetative organs. We readily recognize in them now-adays the natural classes of Dicotyledons and Monocotyledons distinguished alike in vegetative and in reproductive construction, yet showing remarkable parallel sequences in development; and we see that the Dicotyledons are the more advanced and show the greater capacity for further progressive evolution. But there is no sound basis for the assumption that the Dicotyledons are derived from Monocotyledons; indeed, the palaeontological evidence seems to point to the Dicotyledons being the older. This, however, does not entitle us to assume the origin of Monocotyledons from Dicotyledons, although there is manifestly a temptation to connect helobic forms of the former with ranal ones of the latter. There is no doubt that the phylum of Angiosperms has not sprung from that of Gymnosperms. Within each class the flower-characters as the essential feature of Angiosperms supply the clue to phylogeny, but the uncertainty regarding the construction of the primitive angiospermous flower gives a fundamental point of divergence in attempts to construct rogressive sequences of the families. Simplicity of flower-structure as appeared to some to be always primitive, whilst by others it has n taken to be always derived. There is, however, abundant evidence that it may have the one or the other character in different cases. Apart from this, botanists are generally agreed that the concrescence of parts of the flower-whorls—in the gynaeceum as the seed-covering, and in the corolla as the seat of attraction, more than in the androecium and the calyx-is an indication of advance, as is also the concrescence that gives the condition of epigyny. Dorsiventrality is also clearly derived from radial construction, and anatropy of the ovule has followed atropy. We should expect the albuminous state of the seed to be an antecedent one to the exalbuminous condition, and the recent discoveries in fertilization tend to confirm this view. Amongst Dicotyledons the gamopetalous forms are admitted to be the highest development and a dominant one of our epoch. dvance has been along two lines, markedly in relation to insect-pollination, one of which has culminated in the
hypogynous epipetalous bicarpellate forms with dorsiventral often largc and loosely arranged flowers such as occur in Scrophulariaceae, and the other in the epigynous bicarpellate small-flowered families of which the Compositae represent the most elaborate type. In the polypetalous forms progression from hypogyny to epigyny is generally recognized, and where dorsiventrality with insect-pollination has been established, a dominant group has been developed as in the uminosae. The starting-point of the class, however, and the position within it of apetalous families with frequently unisexual flowers, have provoked much discussion. In Monocotyledons a similar advance from hypogyny to epigyny is observed, and from the dorsiventral to the radial type of flower. In this connexion it is noteworthy that so many of the higher forms are adapted as bulbous £ or as aerophytes to special xerophilous conditions. The Pramineae offer a prominent example of a dominant self-pollinated or wind-pollinated family, and this may find explanation in a multiplicity of factors. Though best known for his artificial (or sexual) system, Linnaeus was impressed with the importance of elaborating a natural system of arrangement in which plants, should be arranged according to their true affinities. . In his Philosophia Botanica (1751) Linnaeus grouped the genera then known into sixty-seven orders (fragmenta), all except five of which are Angiosperms. He gave names to these but did not characterize them or attempt to arrange them in larger roups. Some represent natural groups and had in several cases £ already recognized by Ray and others, but the majority are, in the light of modern knowledge, very mixed. Well-defined polypetalous and gamopetalous genera sometimes occur in the same order, and even Monocotyledons and Dicotyledons are classed together where they have some £ ogical character in common. Work on the lines suggested by the Linnaean fragmenta was continued in France by Bernard de ja', and his nephew, Antoine Laurent, and the arrangement suggested by the latter in his Genera Plantarum secundum Ordines Naturales disposita (1789) is the first which can claim to be a natural system. The orders are carefully characterized, and those of Angiosperms are grou in fourteen classes under the two main divisions Monocotyledons and Dicoty: ledons. The former comprise three classes, which are distinguished by the relative position of the stamens and ovary; the eleven classes of the latter are based on the same set of characters and fall into the larger subdivisions Apetalae, Monopetalae and Polypetalae, characterized respectively by absence, union or freedom of the tals, and a subdivision, #: Irregulares, a very unnatural group, including one class only. A. P. de Candolle introduced several improvements into the system. In his arrangement the last subdivision disappears, and the Dicotyledons fall into two groups, a larger containing those in which both calyx and corolla are present in the flower, and a smaller, Monochlamydeae, representing the Apetalae and Diclines Irregulares of Jussieu. The dichlamydeous roup is subdivided into three, Thalamiflorae, Calyciflorae and orolliflorae, depending on the position and union of the petals. This, which we may distinguish as the French system, finds its most rfect expression in the classic Genera Plantarum (1862-1883) of ntham and Hooker, a work containing a description, based on careful examination of specimens, of all known genera of flowering
plants. The subdivision is as follows:Dicotyledons. Thalamiflorae. Polypetalae + Disciflorae. Calyciflorae. nferae. Gamopetalae (Heteromerae. icarpellatae.
Monochlamydeae in eight series.
Of the Polypetalae, series 1, Thalamiflorae, is characterized by hypogynous petals and stamens, and contains 34 orders distributed in 6 # r groups or cohorts. Series 2, Disciflorae, takes its name from £ ment of the floral axis which forms a ring or cushion at the base of the ovary or is broken up into glands; the ovary is superior. It contains 23 orders in 4 cohorts. ries 3, Calyciflorae, has petals and stamens perigynous, or sometimes superior. It contains 27 orders in 5 cohorts. . . .
Of the Gamopetalae, series 1, Inferae, has an inferior ovary and stamens usually as many as the corolla-lobes. It contains 9 orders in 3 cohorts. £: 2, Heteromerae, has generally a superior ovary, stamens as many as the corolla-lobes or more, and more than two carpels. It contains 12 orders : cohorts. Series 3, Bicarpellatae, has generally a superior ovary and usually two carpels. It contains 24 orders in 4 cohorts. -
The eight series of Monochlamydeae, containing 36 orders, form groups characterized mainly by differences in the ovary and ovules, "and are now recognized as of unequal value. -
The seven series of Monocotyledons £ with the most complicated epigynous orders, such as Orchideae an Scitamineae, and passing through the petaloid hypogynous series Coronarieae) of which Liliaceae is the representative to | uncaceae and the palms (series Calycinae) where the perianth loses
its' petaloid character and thence to the Aroids, screw-pines and others where it is more or less aborted (series Nudiflorae). Series 6, Apocarpeae, is characterized by 5 carpels, and in the last series Glumaceae, great simplification in the flower is associated with a grass-like habit. The sequence of orders in the polypetalous subdivision of Dicotyfedons undoubtedly represents a progression from simpler to more elaborate forms, but a t drawback to the value of the system is the inclusion £ the Monochlamydeae of a number of orders which are closely allied with orders of Polypetalae '' differing in absence of a corolla. e German systematist, A. W. Eichler, attempted to remove this disadvantage which since the time of Jussieu had characterized the French system, and in 1883 grouped the Dicotyledons, in two subclasses. The earlier Choripetalae embraces the Polypetalae and Monochlamydae of the French systems. . It includes 21 series, and is an attempt to arrange as far as possible in a linear series those orders which are characterized by absence or freedom of petals. The second subclass, Gamopetalae, includes 9 series and culminates in those which show the most elaborate type of flower, the series Aggregatae, the chief representative of which is the great and wide-spread order Compositae. A modification of Eichler's system, embracing the most recent views of the affinities of the orders of Angiosperms, has been put forward by Dr. Adolf Engler of Berlin, who adopts the suggestive names Archichlamydeae and Metachlamydeae for the two subdivisions of Dicotyledons. Dr Engler is the principal editor of a large series of volumes which, under the title Die naturlichen Pflanzenfamilien, is a systematic account of all the known genera of plants and represents the work of many botanists. More recently in Das Pflanzenreich the same author organized a series of complete monographs of the families of seed-plants. As an attempt at a phylogenetic arrangement, Engler's system is now preferred by many botanists. . More recently a startling novelty in the way of system has been produced by van Tieghem, as follows: M ledons. Liorhizal Dicotyledons. Dicotyledons. INSEMiNeae. SeMiNEAE. Unitegmineae. Bitegmineae. The most remarkable feature here is the class of Liorhizal Dicotyledons, which includes only the families of Nymphacaceae and Gramineae. It is based upon the fact that the histological differentiation of the epidermis of their root is that generally characteristic of Monocotyledons, whilst they have two cotyledons—the old view of the epiblast as a second cotyledon in Gramineae being adopted. But the presence of a second cotyledon in grasses is extremely doubtful, and though there may be ground for reconsidering the position of Nymphaeaceae, their association with the grasses as a distinct class is not warranted by a comparative examination of the members of the two orders. Ovular characters determine the grou ing in the Dicotyledons, van Tieghem supporting the view that the integument, the outer if there be two, is the lamina of a leaf of which the funicle is the petiole, whilst the nucellus is an outgrowth of this leaf, and the inner integument, if present, an indusium. The Insemineae include forms in which the nucellus is not developed, and therefore there can be no seed. e plants included are, however, # well-established parasites, and the absence of nucellus is only one of those characters of reduction to which parasites are liable. Even if we admit van Tieghem's interpretation of the integuments to be correct, the diagnostic mark of his unitegminous and bitegminous groups is simply that of the absence or presence of an indusium, not a character of great value elsewhere, and, as we know, the number of the ovular coats is inconstant within the same family. At the same time the groups based upon the integuments are of much the same extent as the Polypetalae and Gamopetalae of other systems. We do not yet know the significance of this correlation, which, however, is not an invariable one, between number of integuments and union of petals. Within the last few years Prof. John Coulter and Dr C. J. Chamberlain of Chicago University have given a valuable general account of the morphology of Angiosperms as far as concerns the flower, and the series of events which ends in the formation of the seed (Morphology of Angiosperms, Chicago, I # Authorities.-The reader will find in the # owing works details of the subject and references to the literature: Bentham and Hooker, Genera Plantarum (London, 1862-1883); Eichler, Bluthendiagramme (Leipzig, 1875-1878); Engler and Prantl, Die naturlichen
Pflanzenfamilien (Leipzig, 1887-1899); Engler, Syllabus der Pfanzenfamilien, 3rd ed. (Berlin, '9": Knuth, Handbuch der Blutenbiologie (Leipzig, 1898, 1899); S
ANGKOR, an assemblage of ruins in Cambodia, the relic of the ancient Khmer civilization. They are situated in forests to the north of the Great Lake (Tonle-Sap), the most conspicuous
of the remains being the town of Angkor-Thom and the temple of Angkor-Wat, both of which lie on the right bank of the river Siem-Reap, a tributary of Tonle-Sap. Other remains of the same form and character lie scattered about the vicinity on both banks of the river, which is crossed by an ancient stone bridge. Angkor-Thom lies about a quarter of a mile from the river. According to Aymonier it was begun about A. D. 860, in the reign of the Khmer sovereign Jayavarman III., and finished towards A.D. 900. It consists of a rectangular enclosure, nearly 2 m. in each direction, surrounded by a wall from 20 to 30 ft. in height. Within the enclosure, which is entered by five monumental gates, are the remains of palaces and temples, overgrown by the forest. The chief of these are:(1) The vestiges of the royal palace, which stood within an enclosure containing also the pyramidal religious structure known as the Phimeanakas. To the east of this enclosure there extends a terrace decorated with magnificent reliefs. (2) The temple of Bayon, a square enclosure formed by galleries with colonnades, within which is another and more elaborate system of galleries, rectangular in arrangement and enclosing a cruciform structure, at the centre of which rises a huge tower with a circular base. Fifty towers, decorated with quadruple faces of Brahma, are built at intervals upon the galleries, the whole temple ranking as perhaps the most remarkable of the Khmer remains. Angkor-Vat, the best preserved example of Khmer architecture, lies less than a mile to the south of the royal city, within a rectangular park surrounded by a moat, the outer perimeter of which measures 6060 yds. On the west side of the park a paved causeway, leading over the moat and under a magnificent portico, extends for a distance of a quarter of a mile to the chief entrance of the main building. The temple was originally devoted to the worship of Brahma, but afterwards to that of Buddha; its construction is assigned by Aymonier to the first half of the 12th century A.D. It consists of three stages, connected by numerous exterior staircases and decreasing in dimensions as they rise, culminating in the sanctuary, a great central tower pyramidal in form. Towers also surmount the angles of the terraces of the two upper stages. Three galleries with vaulting supported on columns lead from the three western portals to the second stage. They are connected by a transverse gallery, thus forming four square basins. Khmer decoration, profuse but harmonious, consists chiefly in the representation of gods, men and animals, which are displayed on every flat surface. Combats and legendary episodes are often depicted; floral decoration is reserved chiefly for borders, mouldings and capitals. Sandstone of various colours was the chief material employed by the Khmers; limonite was also used. The stone was cut into huge blocks which are fitted together with great accuracy without the use of cement. See E. Aymonier, Le Cambodge (3 vols., 1900–1904); Doudart de Lagrée, Voyage # en Indo-Chine, (1872–1873); A. H. Mouhot, Travels in Indo-China, Cambodia and Laos (2 vols., 1864); Fournereau and Porcher, Les Ruines d'Angkor (1890); L. Delaporte, Voyage au Cambodge: l'architecture, Khmer (1880); J. Moura, Le Royaume de Cambodge (2 vols., 1883). ANGLE (from the Lat. angulus, a corner, a diminutive, of which the primitive form, angus, does not occur in Latin; cognate are the Lat. angere, to compress into a bend or to strangle, and the Gr. &vkos, a bend; both connected with the Aryan root ank-, to bend: see ANGLING), in geometry, the inclination of one line or plane to another. Euclid (Elements, book 1) defines a plane angle as the inclination to each other, in a plane, of two lines which meet each other, and do not lie straight with respect to each other (see GEoMETRY, EUCLIDEAN). According to Proclus an angle must be either a quality or a quantity, or a relationship. The first concept was utilized by Eudemus, who regarded an angle as a deviation from a straight line; the second by Carpus of Antioch, who regarded it as the interval or space between the intersecting lines; Euclid adopted the third concept, although his definitions of right, acute, and obtuse angles are certainly quantitative. A discussion of
these concepts and the various definitions of angles in Euclidean geometry is to be found in W. B. Frankland, The First Book of Euclid's Elements (1905). Following Euclid, a right angle is formed by a straight line standing upon another straight line so as to make the adjacent angles equal; any angle less than a right angle is termed an acute angle, and any angle greater than a right angle an obtuse angle. The difference between an acute angle and a right angle is termed the complement of the angle, and between an angle and two right angles the supplement of the angle. The generalized view of angles and their measurement is treated in the article TRICONOMETRY. A solid angle is definable as the space contained by three or more planes intersecting in a common point; it is familiarly represented by a corner. The angle between two planes is termed dihedral, between three trihedral, between any number more than three polyhedral. A spherical angle is a particular dihedral angle; it is the angle between two intersecting arcs on a sphere, and is measured by the angle between the planes containing the arcs and the centre of the sphere. The angle between a line and a curve (mixed angle) or between two curves (curvilinear angle) is measured by the angle between the line and the tangent at the point of intersection, or between the tangents to both curves at their common point. Various names (now rarely, if ever, used) have been given to particular cases:amphicyrtic (Gr. dudi, on both sides, kvprós, convex) or cissoidal (Gr, kigobs, ivy), biconvex; xystroidal or sistroidal (Gr. $varpis, a tool for scraping), concavo-convex; amphicoelic (Gr. xoixn, a hollow) or angulus lunularis, biconcave. ANGLER, also sometimes called fishing-frog, frog-fish, seadevil (Lophius piscatorius), a fish well known off the coasts of Great Britain and Europe generally, the grotesque shape of its body and its singular habits having attracted the attention of naturalists of all ages. To the North Sea fishermen this fish is known as the “monk,” a name which more properly belongs to Rhina squatina, a fish allied to the skates. Its head is of enormous size, broad, flat and depressed, the remainder of the body The wide mouth extends
Ç." The Angler (Lophius piscatorius). all round the anterior circumference of the head; and both jaws are armed with bands of long pointed teeth, which are inclined inwards, and can be depressed so as to offer no impediment to an object gliding towards the stomach, but to prevent its escape from the mouth. The pectoral and ventral fins are so articulated as to perform the functions of feet, the fish being enabled to move, or rather to walk, on the bottom of the sea, where it generally hides itself in the sand or amongst sea-weed. All round its head and also along the body the skin bears fringed appendages resembling short fronds of sea-weed, a structure which, combined with the extraordinary faculty of assimilating the colour of the body to its surroundings, assists this fish greatly in concealing itself in places which it selects on account of the abundance of prey. To render the organization of this creature perfect in relation to its wants, it is provided with three long filaments inserted along the middle of the head, which are, in fact, the detached and modified three first spines of the anterior dorsal fin. The filament most important in the economy of the angler is the first, which is the longest, terminates in a lappet, and is movable in every direction. The angler is
believed to attract other fishes by means of its lure, and then to seize them with its enormous jaws. It is probable enough that smaller fishes are attracted in this way, but experiments have shown that the action of the jaws is automatic and depends on contact of the prey with the tentacle. Its stomach is distensible in an extraordinary degree, and not rarely fishes have been taken out quite as large and heavy as their destroyer. It grows to a length of more than 5 ft.; specimens of 3 ft. are common. The spawn of the angler is very remarkable. It consists of a thin sheet of transparent gelatinous material 2 or 3 ft. broad and 25 to 30 ft. in length. The eggs in this sheet are in a single layer, each in its own little cavity. The spawn is free in the sea. The larvae are free-swimming and have the pelvic fins elongated into filaments. The British species is found all round the coasts of Europe and western North America, but becomes scarce beyond 60° N. lat.; it occurs also on the coasts of the Cape of Good Hope. A second species (Lophius budegassa) inhabits the Mediterranean, and a third (L. setigerus) the coasts of China and Japan. ANGLESEY, ARTHUR ANNESLEY, 1st EARL of (1614–1686), British statesman, son of the 1st Viscount Valentia (cr. 1621) and Baron Mountnorris (cr. 1628), and of Dorothy, daughter of Sir John Philipps of Picton Castle, Pembrokeshire, was born at Dublin on the 10th of July 1614, was educated at Magdalen College, Oxford, and was admitted to Lincoln's Inn in 1634. Having made the grand tour he returned to Ireland; and being employed by the parliament in a mission to the duke of Ormonde, now reduced to the last extremities, he succeeded in concluding a treaty with him on the 19th of June 1647, thus securing the country from complete subjection to the rebels. In April 1647 he was returned for Radnorshire to the House of Commons. He supported the parliamentary as against the republican or army party, and appears to have been one of the members excluded in 1648. He sat in Richard Cromwell's parliament for Dublin city, and endeavoured to take his seat in the restored Rump Parliament of 1659. He was made president of the council in February 1660, and in the Convention Parliament sat for Carmarthen borough. The anarchy of the last months of the commonwealth converted him to royalism, and he showed great activity in bringing about the Restoration. He used his influence in moderating measures of revenge and violence, and while sitting in judgment on the regicides was on the side of leniency. In November 1660 by his father's death he had become Wiscount Valentia and Baron Mountnorris in the Irish peerage, and on the 20th April 1661 he was created Baron Annesley of Newport Pagnell in Buckinghamshire and earl of Anglesey in the peerage of Great Britain. He supported the king's administration in parliament, but opposed strongly the unjust measure which, on the abolition of the court of wards, placed the extra burden of taxation thus rendered necessary on the excise. His services in the administration of Ireland were especially valuable, He filled the office of vice-treasurer from 1660 till 1667, served on the committee for carrying out the declaration for the scttlement of Ireland and on the committee for Irish affairs, while later, in 1671 and 1672, he was a leading member of various commissions appointed to investigate the working of the Acts of Settlement. In February 1661 he had obtained a captaincy of horse, and in 1667 he exchanged his vice-treasuryship of Ireland for the treasuryship of the navy. His public career was marked by great independence and fidelity to principle. On the 24th of July 1663 he alonesigned a protest against the bill “for the encouragement of trade,” on the plea that owing to the free export of coin and bullion allowed by the act, and to the importation of foreign commodities being greater than the export of home goods, “it must necessarily follow . . . that our silver will also be carried away into foreign parts and all trade fail for want of money.” He especially disapproved of another clause in the same bill forbidding the importation of Irish cattle into England. a mischievous measure promoted by the duke of Buckingham, and he opposed again the bill brought in with that object in January
* Protests of the Lords, by J. E. Thorold Rogers (1875), i. 27: Carti's Life of 6 moni (1851). iv. 234: Pari. Hill. iv. 384.
1667. This same year his naval accounts were subjected to an examination in consequence of his indignant refusal to take part in the attack upon Ormonde; and he was suspended from his office in 1668, no charge,however, against him being substantiated. He took a prominent part in the dispute in 1671 between the two Houses concerning the right of the Lords to amend money bills, and wrote a learned pamphlet on the question entitled The Privileges of the House of Lords and Commons (1702), in which the right of the Lords was asserted. In April 1673 he was appointed lord privy seal, and was disappointed at not obtaining the great seal the same year on the removal of Shaftesbury. In 1679 he was included in Sir W. Temple's new-modelled council. In the bitter religious controversies of the time Anglesey showed great moderation and toleration. In 1674 he is mentioned as endeavouring to prevent the justices putting into force the laws against the Roman Catholics and Nonconformists.” In the panic of the “Popish Plot” in 1678 he exhibited a saner judgment than most of his contemporaries and a conspicuous courage, On the 6th of December he protested with three other peers against the measure sent up from the Commons enforcing the disarming of all convicted recusants and taking bail from them to keep the peace; he was the only peer to dissent from the motion declaring the existence of an Irish plot; and though believing in the guilt and voting for the death of Lord Stafford, he interceded, according to his own account, with the king for him as well as for Langhorne and Plunket. His independent attitude drew upon him an attack by Dangerfield, and in the Commons by the attorney-general, Sir W. Jones, who accused him of endeavouring to stifle the evidence against the Romanists. In March 1679 he protested against the second reading of the bill for disabling Danby. In 1681 Anglesey wrote A Letter from a Person of Honour in the Country, as a rejoinder to the earl of Castlehaven, who had published memoirs on the Irish rebellion defending the action of the Irish and the Roman Catholics. In so doing Anglesey was held by Ormonde to have censured his conduct and that of Charles I. in concluding the “Cessation,” and the duke brought the matter before the council. In 1682 he wrote The Account of Arthur, Earl of Anglesey . . . of the true state of Your Majesty's Government and Kingdom, which was addressed to the king in a tone of censure and remonstrance, but appears not to have been printed till 1694." In consequence he was dismissed on the 9th of August 1682 from the office of lord privy seal. In 1683 he appeared at the Old Bailey as a witness in defence of Lord Russell, and in June 1685 he protested alone against the revision of Stafford's attainder. He died at his home at Blechingdon in Oxfordshire on the 26th of April 1686, closing ... career marked by great ability, statesmanship and business capacity, and by conspicuous courage and independence of judgment. He amassed a large fortune in Ireland, in which country he had been allotted lands by Cromwell. The unfavourable character drawn of him by Burnet is certainly unjust and not supported by any evidence. Pepys, a far more trustworthy judge, speaks of him invariably in terms of respect and approval as a “grave, serious man,” and commends his appointment as treasurer of the navy as that of “a very notable man and understanding and will do things regular and understand them himself.” He was a learned and cultivated man and collected a celebrated library, which was dispersed at his death. Besides the pamphlets already mentioned, he wrote:-A True Account of the Whole Proceedings betwixt . . the Duke of Ormond and . . . the Earl of Anglescy (1682); A Letter of Remarks upon Jovian (1683); other works ascribed to him being The King's Right of Indulgence in Matters Spiritual . . . asserted (1688); Truth Unveiled, to which is added a short Treatise on . . . Transubstantiation (1676); The Obligation resulting from the Oath of Supremacy (1688); and
England's Confusion (1659). Memoirs of Lord Anglesey were published by Sir P. Pett in 1693, but contain little biographical information and were repudiated as a mere imposture by Sir John Thompson (Lord Haversham), his son-in-law, in his preface to Lord Anglesey's State of the Government in 1694. The author however of the preface to The Rights of the Lords asserted (1702), while blaming their publication as “scattered and unfinished papers,” admits their genuineness. Lord Anglesey married Elizabeth, daughter and co-heiress of Sir James Altham of Oxey, Hertfordshire, by whom, besides other children, he had James, who succeeded him, Altham, created Baron Altham, and Richard, afterwards 3rd Baron Altham. His descendant Richard, the 6th earl (d. 1761), left a son Arthur, whose legitimacy was doubted, and the peerage became extinct. He was summoned to the Irish House of Peers as Viscount Valentia, but was denied his writ to the parliament of Great Britain by a majority of one vote. He was created in 1793 earl of Mountnorris in the peerage of Ireland. All the male descendants of the 1st earl of Anglesey became extinct in the person of George, 2nd earl of Mountnorris, in 1844, when the titles of Wiscount Valentia and Baron Mountnorris passed to his cousin Arthur Annesley (1785-1863), who thus became 1oth Viscount Valentia, being descended from the 1st Viscount Valentia, the father of the 1st earl of Anglesey in the Annesley family. The 1st viscount was also the ancestor of the Earls Annesley in the Irish peerage. Authorities.—Dict of Nat. Biography, with authorities there collected; lives in Wood's Athenae Oxonienses (Bliss), iv. 181, Biographia Britannica, and H. Walpole's Royal and Noble Authors (1806), iii. 288 (the latter a very inadequate review of Anglesey's character and career); also Bibliotheca Anglesiana . . . per Thomam Philippum (1686): The Happy Future State of England, by Sir Peter Pett '' Great News from Poland (1683), where his religious tolerance is ridiculed; Somers Tracts (Scott, 1812), viii. 344; Notes of the Privy Council (Roxburghe Club, 1896); Cal. of State #" om.; State Trials, viii. and ix. 619. (P. C. Y.) ANGLESEY, HENRY WILLIAM PAGET, 1st MARQUEss of (1768-1854), British field-marshal, was born on the 17th of May 1768. He was the eldest son of Henry Paget, 1st earl of Uxbridge (d. 1812), and was educated at Westminster School and Christ Church, Oxford, afterwards entering parliament in 1790 as member for Carnarvon, for which he sat for six years. At the outbreak of the French Revolutionary wars Lord Paget (as he was then styled), who had already served in the militia, raised on his father's estate the regiment of Staffordshire volunteers, in which he was given the temporary rank of lieutenant-colonel (1793). The corps soon became part of the regular army as the 8oth Foot, and it took part, under Lord Paget's command, in the Flanders campaign of 1794. In spite of his youth he held a brigade command for a time, and gained also, during the campaign, his first experience of the cavalry arm, with which he was thenceforward associated. His substantive commission as lieutenantcolonel of the 16th Light Dragoons bore the date of the 15th of June 1795, and in 1796 he was made a colonel in the army. In 1795 he married Lady Caroline Elizabeth Williers, daughter of the earl of Jersey. In April 1797 Lord Paget was transferred to a lieut.-colonelcy in the 7th Light Dragoons, of which regiment he became colonel in 1801. From the first he applied himself strenously to the improvement of discipline, and to the perfection of a new system of cavalry evolutions. In the short campaign of 1799 in Holland, Paget commanded the cavalry brigade, and in spite of the unsuitable character of the ground, he made, on several occasions, brilliant and successful charges. After the return of the expedition, he devoted himself zealously to his regiment, which under his command became one of the best corps in the service. In 1802 he was promoted major-general, and six years later lieutenantgeneral. In command of the cavalry of Sir John Moore's army during the Corunna campaign, Lord Paget won the greatest distinction. At Sahagun, Mayorga and Benavente, the British cavalry behaved so well under his leadership that Moore wrote:“It is impossible for me to say too much in its praise. . . . Our cavalry is very superior in quality to any the French have, and the right spirit has been infused into them by the example and instruction of their ... leaders . . . .” At Benavente one of Napoleon's best cavalry leaders, General Lefebvre Desnoëttes, was taken prisoner. Corunna was Paget's last service in the Peninsula. His liaison with the wife of Henry Wellesley, afterwards Lord Cowley, made it impossible at that time for him to serve with Wellington, whose cavalry, on many occasions during the succeeding campaigns, felt the want of the true cavalry leader to direct them. His only war service from 1809 to 1815 was in the disastrous Walcheren expedition (1809) in which he commanded a division. During these years he occupied himself with his parliamentary duties as member for Milborne Port, which he represented almost continuously up to his father's death in 1812, when he took his seat in the House of Lords as earl of Uxbridge. In 1810 he was divorced and married Mrs Wellesley, who had about the same time been divorced from her husband. Lady Paget was soon afterwards married to the duke of Argyll. In 1815 Lord Uxbridge received command of the British cavalry in Flanders. At a moment of danger such as that of Napoleon's return from Elba, the services of the best cavalry general in the British army could not be neglected. Wellington placed the greatest confidence in him, and on the eve of Waterloo extended his command so as to include the whole of the allied cavalry and horse artillery. He covered the retirement of the allies from Quatre Bras to Waterloo on the 17th of June, and on the 18th gained the crowning distinction of his military career in leading the great cavalry charge of the British centre, which checked and in part routed D'Erlon's corps d'armée (see WATERLoo CAMPAIGN). Freely exposing his own life throughout, the earl received, by one of the last cannon shots fired, a severe wound in the leg, necessitating amputation. Five days later the prince regent created him marquess of Anglesey in recognition of his brilliant services, which were regarded universally as second only to those of the duke himself. He was made a G.C.B. and he was also decorated by many of the allied sovereigns. In 1818 the marquess was made a knight of the Garter, in 1819 he became full general, and at the coronation of George IV. he acted as lord high steward of England. His support of the proceedings against Queen Caroline made him for a time unpopular, and when he was on one occasion beset by a crowd, who compelled him to shout “The Queen,” he added the wish, “May all your wives be like her.” At the close of April 1827 he became a member of the Canning administration, taking the post of master-general of the ordnance, previously held by Wellington. He was at the same time sworn a member of the privy council. Under the Wellington administration he accepted the appointment of lord-lieutenant of Ireland (March 1828), and in the discharge of his important duties he greatly endeared himself to the Irish people. The spirit in which he acted and the aims which he steadily set before himself contributed to the allaying of party animosities, to the promotion of a willing submission to the laws, to the prosperity of trade and to the extension and improvement of education. On the great question of the time his views were opposed to those of the government. He saw clearly that the time was come when the relief of the Catholics from the penal legislation of the past was an indispensable measure, and in December 1828 he addressed a letter to the Roman Catholic primate of Ireland distinctly announcing his view. This led to his recall by the government, a step sincerely lamented by the Irish. He pleaded for Catholic emancipation in parliament, and on the formation of Earl Grey's administration in November 1830, he again became lord-lieutenant of Ireland. The times were changed; the act of emancipation had been passed, and the task of viceroy in his second tenure of office was to resist the agitation for repeal of the union carried on by O'Connell. He felt it his duty now to demand Coercion Acts for the security of the public peace; his popularity was diminished, differences appeared in the cabinet on the difficult subject, and in July 1833 the ministry resigned. To the marquess of Anglesey Ireland is indebted for the board of education, the origination of which may perhaps be reckoned as the most memorable act of his viceroyalty. For thirteen years after his retirement he
remained out of office, and took little part in the affairs of government. He joined the Russell administration in July 1846 as master-general of the ordnance, finally retiring with his chief in March 1852. His promotion in the army was completed by his advancement to the rank of field-marshal in 1846. Four years before, he exchanged his colonelcy of the 7th Light Dragoons which he had held over forty years, for that of the Royal Horse Guards. He died on the 29th of April 1854. The marquess had a large family by each of his two wives, two sons and six daughters by the first and six sons and four daughters by the second. His eldest son, Henry, succeeded him in the marquessate; but the title passed rapidly in succession to the 3rd, 4th and 5th marquesses. The latter, whose extravagances were notorious, died in 1905, when the title passed to his cousin. Other members of the Paget family distinguished themselves in the army and the navy. Of the first marquess's brothers one, SIR CHARLES PAGET (1778-1839), rose to the rank of vice-admiral in the Royal Navy; another, General Sir Edward PAGEt (1775-1849), won great distinction by his skilful and resolute handling of a division at Corunna, and from 1822 to 1825 was commander-in-chief in India. One of the marquess's sons by his second marriage, LoRD CLARENCE Edward PAGET (1811-1895), became an admiral; another, LoRD GeoRGE Augustus FREDERICK PAGET (1818-1880), led the 4th Light Dragoons in the charge of the Light Brigade at Balaklava, and subsequently commanded the brigade, and, for a short time, the cavalry division in the Crimea. In 1865 he was made inspector-general of cavalry, in 1871 lieutenant-general and K.C.B., and in 1877 full general. His Crimean journals were published in 1881. ANGLESEY, or ANGLESEA, an insular northern county of Wales. Its area is 176,630 acres or about 276 sq. m. Anglesey, in the see of Bangor, is separated from the mainland by the Menai Straits (Afon Menai), over which were thrown Telford's suspension bridge, in 1826, and the Stephenson tubular railway bridge in 1850. The county is flat, with slight risings such as Parys, Cadair Mynachdy (or Monachdy, i.e. “chair of the monastery”; there is a Nanner, “convent,” not far away) and Holyhead Mountain. There are a few lakes, such as Cors cerrigy daran, but rising water is generally scarce. The climate is humid, the land poor for the most part compared with its old state of fertility, and there are few industries. As regards geology, the younger strata in Anglesey rest upon a foundation of very old pre-Cambrian rocks which appear at the surface in three areas:-(1) a western region including Holyhead and Llanfaethlu, (2) a central area about Aberffraw and Trefdraeth, and (3) an eastern region which includes Newborough, Caerwen and Pentraeth. These pre-Cambrian rocks are schists and slates, often much contorted and disturbed. The general line of strike of the formations in the island is from N.E. to S.W. A belt of granitic rocks lies immediately north-west of the central pre-Cambrian mass, reaching from Llanfaelog near the coast to the vicinity of Llanerchymedd. Between this granite and the pre-Cambrian of Holyhead is a narrow tract of Ordovician slates and grits with Llandovery beds in places; this tract spreads out in the N. of the island between Dulas Bay and Carmel Point. A small patch of Ordovician strata lies on the northern side of Beaumaris. In parts, these Ordovician rocks are much folded, crushed and metamorphosed, and they are associated with schists and altered volcanic rocks which are probably pre-Cambrian. Between the eastern and central pre-Cambrian masses carboniferous rocks are found. The carboniferous limestone occupies a broad area S. of Ligwy Bay and Pentraeth, and sends a narrow spur in a south-westerly direction by Llangefni to Malldraeth sands. The limestone is underlain on the N.W. by a red basement conglomerate and yellow sandstone (sometimes considered to be of Old Red Sandstone age). Limestone occurs again on the N. coast about Llanfihangel and Llangoed; and in the S.W. round Llanidan on the border of the Menai Strait. Puffin Island is made of carboniferous limestone. Malldraeth Marsh is occupied by coal measures, and a small patch of the same formation appears near Tall-y-foel Ferry on the Menai Straits. A patch of granitic and felsitic rocks form Parys Mountain, where copper and iron