456 Eetfo^pective Criticism, 



I find no less than twenty pages devoted to this species of warfare ; the 

 disputes. Sir, of parties as to which first named a bird or discovered a 

 quadruped. I humbly suggest that such articles as these can afford little 

 instruction or amusement to your readers, and tend rather to subvert 

 than advance the interests of science, and to create a distaste for studies 

 which it has. always been your aim to render more popular. I shall not 

 encroach farther on your time and attention, for sure I am that the stricc 

 impartiality with which you have hitherto acted cannot fail to suggest the 

 expediency of putting an end to a discussion totally devoid of interest to 

 the majority of your readers, and reflecting but little credit upon the par- 

 ties engaged in it. I am. Sir, yours, &c, — An Observer. July 12. 1831. 



Note from Mr. Swainson. — Dear Sir, I have waited until now, expect- 

 ing daily to receive from my friend, M. Lesson, a reply to the attacks made 

 upon him by the Vigorsian school, and which he had expressed a wish 

 should appear in your Magazine. This reply, however, has not reached 

 me. M. Lesson is absent from Paris, and the delay, I have reason to ap- 

 prehend, originates in domestic affliction. Be this, however, as it may, I 

 am quite content to remain bespattered with the mud of personal abuse 

 until your next Number. Those to whom I am personally known are well 

 able to discriminate truth from falsehood : but, as this scurrility is intended 

 to prejudice those who do not Jcnow vie^ its author may rest assured of such 

 a reply as will work his sore discomfiture. I am, dear Sir, your faithful 

 obedient servant, — William Swainson, August 11. 1831. 



Management of the Magazine. — Sir, I feel confident that you will agree 

 with me in the broad general principle, that " every promise or engagement 

 ought to be fulfilled." I have been led to make this commonplace remark, 

 the justness of which no one will be disposed to dispute, by observing 

 several subjects commenced in your earlier Numbers with a pledge that 

 they should be continued ; which pledge, however, has not been redeemed 

 in your subsequent pages, though we have now arrived at the fourth volume 

 of the Magazine. I allude particularly to two articles (the one a sequel 

 of the other) in your first and third Numbers (Vol. L p. 37. 242.), on 

 " the principal Forest Trees of Europe, considered as Elements of Land- 

 scape, by J. G. Strutt;" and another, in your second Number (Vol. L 

 p. 147.), an " Introductory Sketch of the Objects and Uses of Meteorolo- 

 gical Science, by E. W. Brayley." In both cases it is added at the 

 conclusion of these Essays, that they are " to be continued." Mr. Strutt's 

 articles are highly interesting in themselves, considered in a general point 

 of view, and are, it strikes me, of especial importance to the landscape- 

 painter, more particularly so, when illustrated, as they have been, by the 

 beautiful wood-cuts of Mr. Williams, who possesses the art of depicting 

 foliage, and hitting off the distinctive characters of trees, in a manner far 

 superior to that of any other xylographer with whose performances I 

 happen to be acquainted. Mr. Brayley's Introductory Sketch is an able 

 essay on a useful and difficult subject; a subject but little understood, and 

 well worthy of farther investigation. But my business at present is not 

 to enlarge on the merits of these articles, but to enquire why they have 

 not been continued, according to promise. Have any of your subscribers 

 objected to the introduction into your Magazine of such subjects generally, 

 or found fault with the manner in which these in particular have been 

 treated ? I know that it is difficult, if not impossible, to please all tastes : 

 at the same time, I am inclined to think, that at least the majority of your 

 readers have too much good sense not to regret, with me, the discon- 

 tinuance of the able and interesting articles alluded to. That blame 

 attaches somewhere, on account of the non-fulfilment of the promise, 

 is quite clear. Does it rest, let me ask, with you as editor, or with the 

 respective authors ? Have you declined to insert what may have been 



