19.' 



MISCELLANEOUS INTELLIGENCE. 



Art. L Iletrospcctiie Criticism. 



Corrections to the last Number. — Ncottia NiJus avis. In the mention of 

 this plant, p. 48., for "the leaves of the central root or caudex" (in line A. 

 from the bottom), read " the base of the central root or caudex." — P. 83. 

 line 20. for " even," substitute " ever." — P. 108. line 17. from the bottom, 

 to the " p." for page, add the figures " 85." 



Lhvusus, as reflecledon in Jiennie s^^ MontagiC s Ornithvlogical Dictionary ^ 

 — Sir, On perusing Mr. llennie's edition of MontagiCs Ornitlwhgical Die- 

 tionary a short time ago (noticed in Vol. IV. p. 422.), I was both surprised 

 and vexed to find the editor endeavouring to depreciate the character of 

 Linnaeus, v/hoss works should be dwelt upon with admiration and delight, 

 by every pei'son who has made the study of natural history an object of 

 pursuit, or who can set a true value on hixn who, by the greatest mental 

 and bodily perseverance (combined with no common natural abilities) 

 raised the science of natural history to an elevation it had never before 

 attained. Whatever may have been his defects (and I do not assert that 

 he was infallible), we cannot but look upon him as the founder of a vast 

 system ; an index to almost every branch of nature, animate or inanimate, 

 by a reference to which, the object sought for is found named, and classed 

 in regular order, accompanied by the remarks of the author. Before the 

 time of Linnffius, the study of natural history presented comparatively few 

 attractions to the student ; he had no book of reference ; all was like chaos, 

 and he must either have invented names and classes for himself, or wanted 

 them altogether. When this " rare master-spirit " (to make use of Mr. 

 llennie's own phrase) appeared, every thing assumed its place in his great 

 volume, and, to the student who Hved after him, all was plain ; the way 

 had been paved for him, and the study, before laborious, was now rendered 

 comparatively easy. 



Mr. Rennie, in making remarks on the Linnaean classification, seems to 

 be criticising one whom he conceives to have devoted his entire attention 

 to the study of ornithology alone, as it is in this department that Mr. 

 licnnie finds most defects, and to which his observations have been parti- 

 cularly directed. Was it to be expected that the all-comprehensive 

 system of Linnaeus could be correct in every part ? Is it not almost beyond 

 the boimds of possibility that any one man should devote a portion of his 

 time and labour to every branch of natural history, and make each depart- 

 ment so correct that no errors could afterwards be discovered. A man 

 who employs his time and talents in the study of ornithology alone, must 

 be expected to have a much more minute and accurate acquaintance with 

 it than one who has applied himself to_ the more extended branches of 

 zoology. To several eminent ornithologists who lived some years since, 

 and to some of those who are now giving their remarks to the world, we 

 ixre indebted for improvements in the Linnaean system ; but do their 

 observations do more than show that Linn;)eus had overlooked some of 

 those more minute differences, which in the present dav arc deemed of 



Vol. v. — No. 21. o 



