• to Mr. Arthur Aikin. ' 255 



tiave generally only one, and the woman, we believe, has 

 twins more frequently than the cow. We have consulted * 

 those who have had more experience in these matters than 

 ourselves, and are assured that new-born children do not 

 show a partiality for one breast, but, which may easily be 

 explained on other principles, are often found to incline to 

 that which they sucked Last. Were we even to admit the 

 doctor's assumption as a fact, to make it harmonize with 

 his system, a woman should always bear twins, each of 

 which should have exclusively its own breast." 



I would here beg your reviewer to read what is said in 

 the Elements of Natural History, (published for Cadell jun. 

 and W. Davies, and William Creech, Edinburgh, 1801,) 

 p. 66 . — " The breasts or dugs {mamma?) of these animals, 

 in which the milk is secreted from the blood, are furnished 

 with teats or nipples, which the young suck. The dugs are 



* As this reviewer is extremely fond, in ail difficulties, of consultation, 

 the philosophic world would wish to know a little of the natiue of these 

 wise men he consults, as described by the reviewer himself, p. 834.. 

 When reviewing Dr. Shaw's work, the writer says : " Jt is pleasant after 

 a short separation to rejoin an intelligent fellow-traveller, from whose 

 extensive acquaintance with the country, and literal communications con- 

 cerning it, we have already derived much entertainment and instruction, j 

 and though we are not likely to accompany him again through scenes 

 equally luxuriant and romantic, we still associate with his person the pro- 

 spects which we have formerly enjoyed, and find something to delight us 

 in our passage over many a dreary heath. With sensations of this kind 

 we take up the fourth volume of Dr. Shaw's General Zoology. We re- 

 cognize the countenance and Jpfianners'of an old friend. We enter at once 

 into his style of composition; and though his present subject may not 

 promise us all the satisfaction which th.2 former part of his work afforded, 

 iue are persuaded that we shall not rise from it d'sappoiuted an:i dis- 

 pleastd." This consistent reviewer, in a pqge or two after, coming 

 to the genus Holocentrus and Bodianus : " Here," cries the reviewer, 

 " we confess ourselves to be completely posed. We had learnt, indeed, 

 something concerning the size and colour of the scales ; but as far as re- 

 lates to these, any one of the species might be placed with equal propriety 

 under either of the genera ; and with respect to their roughness or smooth- 

 ness, we were still as much at a loss as ever. Conceiving that we must 

 have overlooked some part of the description, and attributing the over- 

 sight to the infirmity of eyes impaired by the midnight watchings of many 

 years, we first trimmed our lamp ; then iviped our spectacles ; and theri 

 took down a pair of greater magnifying power, which we use only io 

 mend our pen and on other special occasions : (he should have added, and 

 blew 'our noses, to clear our beads;) but all to no purpose. As our last 

 resort, we applied to alk our fellow critics " in solemn divan assembled:" 

 bit still in vain. The difficulty was no sooner stated, than every one, a-j 

 if animated by one soul, rapidly exclaimed, Davus sum, non (Edipus: k 

 is a knot which none but a god, or one msptr, d by the gods, can untie. To 

 he serious ; generic characters so constrmttd are a disgrace to science.. 

 They assume a scientijic appearance, but they teach nothing" 



I in 



