16 lees's lecture Oh THE AFFINITIES OF 



to the author's personal observations, puts us in possession of a multitude 

 of facts, feathered from many volumes, some not of easy access to the 

 ordinary reader. The currency of knowledpre would be indeed limited 

 if the objections of the sage cavillers to whom Mr. Lees makes allusion, 

 were to be held valid, and " the stores of the illustrious dead" to remain 

 a mystical treasure hidden in a sepulchre, and sealed hermetically from 

 the eyes and hands of posterity. Hypothesis, unsustained by authority, 

 however borne out by evidence, is apt to be questioned in an age some- 

 what disputatious and sceptical, even upon matters of less doubtful 

 character than those connected with scientific opinion. Mr. Lees has, 

 therefore, very prudently selected the soundest testimony in aid of his 

 statements, and by fortifying his positions with the investigations of the 

 most eminent naturalists, has built a wall of security round his own very 

 admirable structure. The charge of plagiarism levelled against a treatise 

 which must, of necessity, be compiled from the research and experience 

 of others as well as of the author, would be as ridiculous as contemptible, 

 and should any individual advance the accusation against Mr. Lees, we 

 advise the latter to leave him quietly to his own imenviable feelings. 

 Upon the subject of plagiarism. Lord Byron judiciously expressed 

 himself when he said, ** Who is the author that is not either intentionally 

 or unintentionally a plagiarist ? Many more, I am persuaded, the latter 

 than the former, for if one has read much, it is impossible to avoid 

 adopting, not only the thoughts, but the expressions of others, which, 

 after they have been stored sometime in our mind, come forth ready 

 formed, like Minerva from the brain of Jupiter, and we fancy them our 

 own progeny instead of our adoption.'* (Vide Lady Blessington's 

 Conversations.) 



That Mr. Lees has not perused the book of nature as the elder Richard- 

 son (the painter) perused the classics,* is manifest from the numerous 

 novel deductions and accurate remarks interspersing his pages. "The 

 affinities of plants with man and animals," or those traits of resemblance 

 and the degree of relationship subsisting between the animal and 

 vegetable worlds, constitutes the basis of his lecture ; a subject which is 

 one of delightful tendency, and fertile in matter for speculation. After 

 a sketch of the attractions of Natural History, Mr. Lees enters into a 

 brief but sufficiently intelligible outline of the three principal divisions 

 of botanical enquiry ; viz. — Systematic Botany ; the Geographical and 

 Natural Distribution of Plants ; and Vegetable Physiology. Having dis- 

 missed these preliminaries, he gradually developes his theme, exhibiting 

 ** those points of resemblance which seem to connect them (plants and 

 animals) with each other, the hold which they have upon our wants and 

 pleasures, and that subservient relationship which incontestibly proves 

 on the one hand that plants were created for the use of our species, and 

 on the other that without them neither man nor animals could exist on 

 this material globe." (P. 3.) In pursuit of his subject, Mr. Lees pro- 

 fesses to "descend in regular gradation from the most perfect specimen 

 of creative wisdom, along the successive links in this curious chain, till 

 we at length approach that dubious zoophytic boundary where sensation 

 and perception are so blended with apparent vegetation, that it is difficult 

 to determine where the vegetable ends and the animal begins." (V. 13.) 

 This promise would appear, at " the first blush," much more likely to 



* When Richardson (who -was a man of limited education) brought out his 

 volumes, he thought proper to account for the appearance of the numerous classical 

 quotations with which they were garnished, by confessing that he had made use of 

 the eyes of his son in perusing the ancients. 



