48 Mr. W. S. MacLeay on some Remarks ofM, Virey. 



in a review of my paper " On the Identity of certain Laws observed to 

 regulate the Natural Distribution of Insects and Fungi," has charged me 

 with not rendering justice to the claims of the French naturalists in gene- 

 ral, and of himself in particular. " Au reste," says he, " sauf T arrange- 

 ment, ces vues que s'attribuent MM. MacLeay et Agardh ont ete publiees 

 bien auparavant dans Particle Animal du Nouveau Dictionnaire d'Histoire 

 Naturelle, des la premiere edition en 1803, par M. Virey, comme il est 

 facile de voir." On this passage I have in the first place to remark, that 

 if by " ces vues'' he meant the views explained at length in this article of 

 the Bulletin des Sciences by M. Virey, and attributed to me, it behoves me 

 to confess, that this review is the first notice that I ever had of their ex- 

 istence; and moreover, that now, when I know them, I have not the 

 slightest wish to be able to attribute them to myself. In the next place, 

 with respect to my not having cited the article Animal of Deterville's 

 Dictionary, the assertion is beyond doubt perfectly true ; and as from my 

 having alluded to this very article, page 200 of the Horce Entomologicce, 

 it may be supposed that I had read it, I am further called upon, in conse- 



to know, that I have also been blamed for giving them too much credit. Aa 

 he has decided on the merits of the Horce Entomologicae, and has reviewed my 

 papers in the Linnean Transactions, I cannot lay the above singular accusation 

 against me to the account of his never having read these several works : I must 

 rather attribute them to the circumstance either of my not having very clearly 

 expressed myself, or of his not being very deeply versed in the English lan- 

 giiage. That, moreover, one or otljer of the latter suppositions must be the 

 true alternative, sufficiently appears from his asserting, that Mr. MacLeay 

 denies the truth of the ancient adage, " Natura nan facit saltus." In short, 

 so far from a faithful exposition of my views, as he kindly promises at i^he out- 

 set, he has given one so different from that in the Linnean Transactions, that 

 I can scarcely recognize any one position to be correctly stated. If, therefore, 

 it be true, as he says, after having given his exposition of the subject, " Ainsi 

 prevalent a la longue les travaux des Fran^ais qui les premiers ont ouvert la 

 carriere," I for one have not the least ambition to jostle lagrande nation in their 

 course. That, however, much of these cross-purposes proceed from M. Virey 

 not reading very carefully, is clear from his other review, in the same work, of 

 my paper on the Oistros of the ancients, where the value of his favourable opi- 

 nion is unfortunately lost in my eyes, when I find myself proving this celebrated 

 insect to be a Tahanus by the final citation from Mouffet ! 



