M. Fee's Life ofLinnceus. Of 



long phrase, so that the mere catalogue of a garden became a 

 quarto volume ; and as no individual knew them by heart, they 

 were mentioned loosely and inaccurately. It was Linnseus'^s 

 contrivance to apply to the nomenclature of natural productions 

 the same system which is allowed in that of individuals of the 

 human race ; each animal, each plant, had a generic name which 

 corresponds to our family name, and a specific one which resem- 

 bles our baptismal one. Thus the names became short, clear 

 and precise, they could be retained by the memory, which allows 

 us to expect that they will one day be universally used. 



These two great basis, the terminology and the nomenclature, 

 being fixed, Linnaeus had the courage to apply them to every 

 department of natural history : he traced the tableau of the three 

 kingdoms according to these principles, and astonished the world 

 both by the variety and accuracy of his knowledge, and the care 

 which he took in the introduction of a crowd of new objects and 

 striking remarks into this vast picture ; he mentioned under 

 each article the ancient names which were not in use, the best 

 figures, and the most certain localities which he could discover. 

 He supported his general works by a mass of interesting an4 

 original memoirs, in which he explained such points as could 

 not be satisfactorily unfolded in his usual concise manner, &c. 

 Ought we, then, to wonder at the learned world being astonished 

 at such immense works, and at the same time that changes so 

 complete as to forms and terms should embarrass those who had 

 spent their lives in teaching others, and thus divided naturalists 

 into enthusiastic admirers, and sometimes unjust detractors of 

 Linnajus? 



Having thus considered the form of Linnaeus's works, if we 

 now cast a glance at his classification, we will, in analyzing it, 

 m^t with a curious exemplification of this twofold proposition; 

 some writers admiring what Linnaeus himself regarded as pre- 

 carious and provisionary, and others blaming those parts of his 

 Vt'Orks which are the most deserving of praise. I shall explain 

 what I mean. Linnaeus appears to have been the first natural- 

 ist who clearly comprehended the difference between the natural 

 and the artificial systems ; he was especially, notwithstanding the 

 vivacity of his genius and his desire to sway the whole of 

 science, he, I say, was perfectly aware that the number of ob- 



