ofM^Leay, Swainson, Vigors, fyc. 135 



conformity to the rule given at p. 224-., forming the second 

 proposition ; viz. that " the primary circular divisions of every 

 group are three actually, or Jive apparently ? " Or does it 

 agree with any of the other groups which Mr. Swainson has 

 with some difficulty defined ? The answer must be in the 

 negative ; and we thus find that the very example to which 

 Mr. Swainson, at p. 226. of his " Treatise" refers his readers, 

 as proof of the validity of the first principles of his system, 

 not only gives clear evidence against them, but at the same 

 time manifests an entire absence of that pervading uniform 

 principle, even in the primary arrangement of the animal king- 

 dom, which Mr. Swainson, in most parts of his works, has so 

 much enlarged upon. 



The application of the first two propositions of the Quinary 

 System, in the smaller divisions of the animal kingdom, now 

 claims our consideration. Mr. Swainson divides the class 

 Mammalia into five orders ; viz. : — Quadnimana, Ferae, 

 Cetacea, Ungulata, and Glires. How these orders constitute 

 a natural progressive series forming a circle, we are at a loss 

 to determine. We are never informed through what medium 

 Glires and Quadriimana " blend together at their confines." 

 But, supposing this could be shown, the " circle " then would 

 not be natural, in the true sense of the word. 



The Linnaean method is universally acknowledged artificial. 

 It was morally impossible, with the comparatively few ma- 

 terials which Linnaeus possessed, for him to construct a natural 

 system. Since his time a great advance has been made in 

 natural history, and some thousands of species, entirely un- 

 known to him, have been discovered* Hence new divisions, 

 and new sub-divisions, have been required, and have there- 

 fore been formed: it is from this cause that many of his 

 genera now constitute families, that many of his orders are 

 now raised to the rank of classes, and so on. When Lin- 

 naeus published his system, it was not advisable for him to make 

 more divisions than was absolutely necessary. His system, 

 for the age in which he lived, was sufficiently complicated : 

 had it been more so, it would not have answered the purpose 

 which he intended. No one, we are pretty sure, was more 

 aware that the Linnaean arrangement was artificial than the 

 learned author of it himself was. The end of Linnaeus was 

 answered ; he put into the hands of the student a system 

 which he could use ; a system, actuated and led on by which, 

 he might attain an eminent and useful knowledge of natural 

 history. We can see no reason, however, for modern na- 

 turalists still pursuing and treading in the steps of Linnaeus. 

 His method was then an advantage ; it would now be a disad- 



L 4 



