370 On the Doctrine of 



supposed analogy between animals and vegetables is, there- 

 fore, as far as Mr. Macleay's system is concerned, an ab- 

 solute fallacy. That of Professor Agardh we will quote, 

 and leave our readers to form their own opinions of the 

 analogies discovered by it. Dicotyledones, this ingenious 

 botanist discovers to be analogous to mammiferae ; monoco- 

 tyledones to birds ; ferns and mosses to amphibia ; and the 

 lowest orders of vegetation to fishes ! 



With respect to the accordance of the various opinions 

 that exist in nature, reducible to some definite number, it is 

 scarcely possible that any systems can be more discor- 

 dant. We have seen that Oken and Fries maintain the 

 number four ; Mr. Macleay, who is followed by several 

 experienced naturalists, contends for the number ^z;^; Mr. 

 Kirby, whose extensive knowledge of Mr. Macleay's own 

 ground cannot be disputed, seems to incline to the number 

 seven ; while Mr. Virey is said to prefer the number three ; 

 to say nothing of those who think a binary or dichotonous 

 mode of division is the true one, thus dignifying the com- 

 monest principles of analysis with the name of system. Mr. 

 Macleay, indeed, attempts to reconcile his ideas with those 

 of Fries, by assuming that the latter really used a quinary 

 mode of arrangement under the semblance of a quaternary 

 system ; but this Mr. Fries, in a recent work, expressly de- 

 nies, disclaiming all disposition to attach cabalistical virtues 

 to any number whatever. Indeed, without such a dis- 

 claimer, it is evident, after what we have seen of Oken's 

 system, upon which Fries certainly builds, that it is quite 

 impossible that the number five could have entered into his 

 contemplation. 



Of the external evidence by which these systems are 

 supported, we have little necessity, and less space to treat. 

 Professor Agardh, who evidently leans to the opinion of 

 Oken, is obliged to confess {Syst. Alg. xii.) that he cannot 

 reduce the Algae, his own peculiar tribe, to four divisions, 

 and that, on the contrary, six is the number to which he 

 finds these plants reducible. So through the whole of his 

 Aphorisms, and even his latest work, the Classes Plantarum, it 

 is obvious that he finds it impossible to divide vegetation by 

 any certain number whatever. Mr. Macleay's reliance 

 upon the system of Fries, in support of his notions of qui- 

 nary divisions, we have already seen to be unsupported ; so 

 is his appeal to De Candolle. That botanist has, indeed, 

 established five principal tribes of Cruciferae, the number of 

 which, by the way, is already altered by the discovery of 



