more trustworthy? Was not the necessity of an entire change of system, a proof that the ground, whatever that was, on which the electrochemical principle was adopted, was an unfounded assumption? And, in fact, do we not find that the same argument which was allowed to be fatal to the First System of Berzelius, applies in exactly the same manner against the Second? If the electro-positive elements be often isomorphous, are not the electro-negative elements sometimes isomorphous also for instance, the arsenic and phosphoric acids. But to go further, what is the ground on which the electro-chemical arrangement is adopted? Granted that the electrical relations of bodies are important; but how do we come to know that these relations have anything to do with mineralogy? How does it appear that on them, principally, depend those external properties which mineralogy must study? How does it appear that because sulphur is the electro-negative part of one body, and an acid the electro-negative part of another, these two elements similarly affect the compounds? How does it appear that there is any analogy whatever in their functions? We allow that the composition must, in some way, determine the classified place of the mineral, but why in this way?

I do not dwell on the remark which Berzelius himself makes on Nordenskiöld's system;-that it assumes a perfect knowledge of the composition in every case; although, considering the usual discrepancies of analyses of minerals, this objection must make all pure chemical systems useless. But I may observe, that mineralogists have not yet determined what characters are sufficiently affixed to determine a species of minerals. We have seen that the ancient notion of the composition of a species, has been unsettled by the discovery of isomorphism. The tenet of the constancy of the angle is rendered doubtful by cases of plesiomorphism. The optical properties, which are so closely connected with the crystalline, are still so imperfectly known, that they are subject to changes which appear capricious and arbitrary. Both the chemical and the optical mineralogists have constantly, of late, found occasion to separate species which had been united, and to bring together those which had been divided. Everything shows that, in this science, we have our classification still to begin. The detection of that fixity of characters, on which a right establishment of species must rest, is not yet complete, great as the progress is which we have made, by acquiring a knowledge of the laws of crystallization and of

Jahres Bericht. viii. 188.

definite chemical constitution. Our ignorance may surprise us; but it may diminish our surprise to recollect, that the knowledge which we seek is that of the laws of the physical constitution of all bodies whatever; for to us, as mineralogists, all chemical compounds are minerals.

The defect of the principle of the natural-history classifiers may be thus stated:-in studying the external characters of bodies, they take for granted that they can, without any other light, discover the relative value and importance of those characters. The grouping of Species into a Genus, of Genera into an Order, according to the method of this school, proceeds by no definite rules, but by a latent talent of appreciation, a sort of classifying instinct. But this course cannot reasonably be expected to lead to scientific truth; for it can hardly be hoped, by any one who looks at the general course of science, that we shall discover the relation between external characters and chemical composition, otherwise than by tracing their association in cases where both are known. It is urged that in other classificatory sciences, in botany, for example, we obtain a natural classification from external characters without having recourse to any other source of knowledge. But this is not true in the sense here meant. In framing a natural system of botany, we have constantly before our eyes the principles of physiology; and we estimate the value of the characters of a plant by their bearing on its functions,-by their place in its organization. In an unorganic body, the chemical constitution is the law of its being; and we shall never succeed in framing a science of such bodies but by studiously directing our efforts to the interpretation of that law.

On these grounds, then, I conceive, that the bold attempts of Mohs and of Berzelius to give new forms to mineralogy, cannot be deemed successful in the manner in which their authors aspired to succeed. Neither of them can be marked as a permanent reformation of the science. I shall not inquire how far they have been accepted by men of science, for I conceive that their greatest effect has been to point out improvements which might be made in mineralogy without going the whole length either of the pure chemical, or of the pure naturalhistory system.

Sect. 4.-Return to Mixed Systems with Improvements.

In spite of the efforts of the purists, mineralogists returned to mixed systems of classification; but these systems are much better than they were before such efforts were made.

CHAFTER L

IMAGINARY KNOWLEDGE OF PLANTS.

THE spprehenson of such rences and resemblances as those by wildd we group agether and discriminate the various kinds of plans and animals and the appropriation of words to mark and convey the resulting actets must be presupposed, as essential to the very beginning of human knowledge. In whatever manner we imagine man so de placed on the earth by his Creator, these processes must be conceived to be as eer Scriptures represent them, contempoweeds vid de ist extron of reason, and the first use of speech. If we were to lage ourselves in framing a hypothetical account of dhe orgn of "anguage, we should probably assume as the first-formed werds these which depend on the visible likeness or unlikeness of objees; and should arrange as of subsequent formation, those terms which any, in the mind as of wider combination and higher abstraction. At any rate, it is certain that the names of the kinds of vegetables and animals are very abundant even in the most uncivilized stages of man's career. Thus we are informed that the inhabitants of New Zealand have a Estinct name of every tree and plant in their sand, of wreù there are six or seven hundred or more different Prds. In the accounts of the rulest tribes, in the earliest legends, poetry, and Sterature of nations, pines and oaks, roses and violets, the sëve and the vine, and the thousand other productions of the earth, have a place, and are spoken of in a manner which assumes, that in sucht kends of natural objects permanent and infallible distinctions Yad been observed and universay recognized.

For a long period, it was not suspected that any ambiguity or confusion could arise from the use of such terms; and when such inconveniences ¿'d occur, as even in early times they did.) men were far from divining that the proper remedy was the construction of a science of classification. The loose and insecure terms of the language of common e retained their place in botany, long after their

1 Yate's New Zealand, p. 238.

defects were severely felt: for instance, the vague and unscientific distinction of vegetables into trees, shrubs, and herbs, kept its ground till the time of Linnæus.

While it was thus imagined that the identification of a plant, by means of its name, might properly be trusted to the common uncultured faculties of the mind, and to what we may call the instinct of language, all the attention and study which were bestowed on such objects, were naturally employed in learning and thinking upon such circumstances respecting them as were supplied by any of the common channels through which knowledge and opinion flow into men's minds.

The reader need hardly be reminded that in the earlier periods of man's mental culture, he acquires those opinions on which he loves to dwell, not by the exercise of observation subordinate to reason; but, far more, by his fancy and his emotions, his love of the marvellous, his hopes and fears. It cannot surprise us, therefore, that the earliest lore concerning plants which we discover in the records of the past, consists of mythological legends, marvellous relations, and extraordinary medicinal qualities. To the lively fancy of the Greeks, the Narcissus, which bends its head over the stream, was originally a youth who in such an attitude became enamored of his own beauty: the hyacinth, on whose petals the notes of grief were traced (A 1, A 1), recorded the sorrow of Apollo for the death of his favorite Hyacinthus: the beautiful lotus of India,3 which floats with its splendid flower on the surface of the water, is the chosen seat of the goddess Lackshmi, the daughter of Ocean. In Egypt, too, Osiris swam on a lotus-leaf, and Harpocrates was cradled in one. The lotus-eaters of Homer lost immediately their love of home. Every one knows how easy it would be to accumulate such tales of wonder or religion.

Those who attended to the effects of plants, might discover in them some medicinal properties, and might easily imagine more; and when the love of the marvellous was added to the hope of health, it is easy to believe that men would be very credulous. We need not dwell upon the examples of this. In Pliny's Introduction to that book of his

2 Lilium martagon.

Ipse suos gemitus foliis inscribit et a 1, a 1,

Flos habet inscriptum funestaque litera ducta est.-OVID.

* Nelumbium speciosum.

Sprengel, Geschichte der Botanik, i. 27.

Ib. i. 28.

Natural History which treats of the medicinal virtues of plants, he sers" "Antignity was so much struck with the properties of herbs, that # affirmed things incredible. Xanthus, the historian, says, that a man killed by a dragon, will be restored to life by an herb which he csis halin and that Thylo, when killed by a dragon, was recovered by the same plant. Democritus asserted, and Theophrastus believed, that there was an herb, at the touch of which, the wedge which the woodman had driven into a tree would leap out again. Though we cuonot creda these stories, most persons believe that almost anything might be effected by means of herbs, if their virtues were fully known.” How far from a reasonable estimate of the reality of such virtues were the persons who entertained this belief, we may judge from the many supers; toas observances which they associated with the gathering and wing of medicinal plants Theophrastus speaks of these; "The drugsectors and the rhizotomists (root-cutters) tell us," he says, "some things which may be tran bat other things which are merely solemn quackery; 1)as they direct us to gather some plants, standing from the wind, and with our dades anointed; some by night, some by day, some before De ser wis on them. So far there may be something in their rules. Nut others are too fantastical and far fetched. It is, perhaps, not and am a prayer in plucking a plant; but they go further than Da. We are to draw a sword three times round the mandragora, and to our # looking to the west; again, to dance round it, and to use Abusu lenguem as they say those who sow cumin should utter blas

Agen we are to draw a line round the black hellebore, sending to the cast and praying; and to avoid an eagle either on the mads or on the hd: fon, say they, if an eagle be near, the cutter will

Da A...xt Ma serve to show the extent to which these imaginaFox More perky, and the manner in which they were looked upon A thanalais, our first great botanical author. And we may now vesauce that we love gien sent attention to these fables and superstars, whed have no place in the history of the progress of me know luiga expy to show the strange chaos of wild fancies and kgways out a wich # had to emerge. We proceed to trace the kon ode tinge of plans