90 M. Fee's Life of Linnaus. 



This intimacy was interrupted by their travels; they met in 

 Holland in 1735. Linnaeus presented Artedi to Seba, to assist 

 him in the publication of his hirge work, and their meeting re- 

 estabhshed the practice of their early days, in trusting and con- 

 sulting each other in their labours. Unfortunately Artedi fell 

 into a canal in Amsterdam, and was drowned. Linnaeus in- 

 duced Mr ClifFort to purchase his manuscripts, and published, 

 under the name of his friend, the remarkable works which he 

 had left on the classification of fishes. 



The connexion between Linnaeus and'Dillenius commenced 

 hi a manner which was by no means friendly. This botanist, 

 who, at the appearance of Linnaeus, was doubtless the most able 

 of his age, was distinguished for great minuteness of details, but 

 never seemed to have occupied himself seriously with classifica- 

 tion on a great scale, and, accordingly, ill appreciated that which 

 was truly eminent in the innovations of Linnaeus ; but, on the 

 other hand, was particularly alive to the embarrassment which 

 a new nomenclature introduced into the science. " This is the 

 person zvho will embroil the whole of botany^'' said Diilenius to 

 his friend Sherard, on seeing the debut of Linnaeus. In many 

 respects, however, his prejudices gave way. Linnaeus, during 

 the time he lived in England, and in the course of his corres- 

 pondence, astonished him with his knowledge, and by his ur- 

 banity increased their intimacy 



Another rival of Linnaeus, who would have been the most 

 dangerous of them all had he closely followed in the same pur- 

 suit, was Haller. This astonishing man, at once poet, physi- 

 cian, anatomist, physiologist and bibliopolist, had very peculiar 

 ideas respecting the natural system, and would have made im- 

 mense improvements had botany been the sole object of his re- 

 $earches. He applied his attention to a very limited subject, the 

 Flora of Switzerland, and he aff'ected the popularity of his work 

 by not adopting the nomenclature of Linnaeus in his classifica- 

 tion, and rejecting the first part, which was excellent, on ac- 

 count of his, antipathy to the second. 



These celebrated men were on an intimate and confidential 

 footing for a long time, and proved, that notwithstanding the 

 diversity of -their opinions, tliey mutually did jtistice to esach 

 other. A slight misunderstanding. occurred occasionally, owing 



