sustained ; and the proprietors of the Botanical Register have cer- 

 tainly no cause to congratulate themselves upon exemption from such. 

 Finally, repetitions may arise from inadvertence; and then they 

 become part of those errors to which all are liable, and which are 

 carried to the account between the editor and the public. We have 

 said thus much, as if the degree of public inconvenience which is 

 assumed had been proved to exist. To do this, it must be shewn 

 that a greater number of persons purchase all the periodical publica- 

 tions to which the charges in question refer, than a part, — one, for 

 example, only. We strongly suspect that this would not only not 

 appear upon mvestigation, but that exactly the reverse would prove 

 to be the fact; namely, that by far the greater number of purchasers 

 of one Botanical periodical possess that alone : that such is the case 

 to a great extent, we certamly know. Now, in the latter point of 

 view, what at first appeared a hardship becomes a positive advantage ; 

 and hesitation on the part of A to publish that which the work of 

 B previously contained, would be an injustice to the subscribers to 

 A; because it would have the eflfect of obliging the possessors of 

 A's work to procure B's also, 

 booksellers, but not quite so advantageous to the public. 



We have been tempted to make these remarks, not because we 

 feel that the conduct of the Botanical Register requires justification, 

 but because we think that the public has a right to expect explanations 

 upon public matters, from those who look to the public for support. 



J. L. 



the 



\ 



