/20 ON THE POPULARITY OP NATURAL HISTORY. 



of mother-of-pearl, containing four blue gems ; a Rose, bathed in the dews of 

 morning, was suspended above it ; the male Bullfinch sat motionless on a neigh- 

 bouring shrub, like a flower of purple and crimson. These objects were reflected 

 in the water of a stream, together with the shade of an aged Walnut-tree, which 

 served as a back-ground to the scene, and behind which appeared the ruddy tints 

 of Aurora. In this little picture the Almighty conveyed to us an idea of the 

 graces with which he has decked all Nature." 



Though perhaps, in this finished sketch, it is a little stretch of imagination to 

 compare our sprightly " Hedge Coalhood" to a flower, yet as a double picture is 

 exhibited in it, and either is charming taken alone, the pleasing exhibition may 

 almost excuse it. For, independently of the Bullfinch, the old Walnut-tree re- 

 flected in the stream, with the vermillion tinges of the eastern sky, seen through 

 its foliage, is itself a picture, and the Bullfinch's nest and eggs in the Rose-bush 

 is an object by itself requiring no adventitious aid to heighten its beauty. 



It will now perhaps be perceived that popular Natural History is nothing 

 more than a description of natural objects so true to Nature that every one admits 

 the resemblance, being either tested by his own experience or by that of others, 

 and the information at the same time conveyed in that non-technical language 

 which may be understood by every person of plain education, although unskilled 

 in and unacquainted with the myriological vocabulary of scientific formulae. I 

 have no wish to disparage scientific nomenclature when restricted to legitimate 

 bounds, but in an appeal to facts it would be absurd to blink^ altogether the 

 question of phraseology. Scientific names can only be understood by scientific 

 persons, and it follows as a matter of course that a book that can be interpreted 

 only by the initiated, will have but a limited range of readers. This ought to 

 be considered by those authors and editors of periodicals who, as in the Entomo- 

 logical Magazine, indulge at times in such legions of latin, as I fear to render it 

 unnecessary to cut-up much of their hot-pressed paper. It is true that certain 

 subjects, limited in their range, or intended for the learned of all countries, 

 may with the utmost propriety appear in a latin dress, but surely an Eng- 

 lish periodical is not the place for them, if that periodical seeks an exten- 

 sive circulation. By parity of reasoning, any work on Natural History aim- 

 ing to be read by the public at large, must to some extent be written on the 

 principle of what I have shown popular Natural History to consist. There 

 are two especial reasons for this ; a work overloaded with technicalities is 

 uninteresting, and very few will toil through a work void of interest. The next 

 point is an important one, though for the most part lost sight of — the newspaper 

 press of this country is almost wholly ignorant of Natural History, at all events 

 unacquainted with its details, and hence unable to interpret common occurrences 

 and common appearances without the assistance of a practised observer. The 



