INTRODUCTION. xli 



Schoeffer has avoided giving that name to any one of them. Many- 

 like inftances might be pointed out in Schoeffer's work, and not in that 

 alone. 



I always had, and Hill have, an averfion to the unneceflary multiplying 

 of fpecific names in our botanic nomenclature ; and there is no order ot 

 plants, where we are fo liable to flip into errors of that kind, as in the 

 Funguffes. 



There is a pride in man, to be thought the inventor or difcoverer of 

 fomething new. In regard to things ufeful, this is a laudable vanity; 

 but to add a new name to a known plant, or other fubject in Natural 

 Hiftory, becaufe we meet with an individual perhaps diftorted in its fhape, 

 diminilhed or increafed in its quantity, fickened by improper food or foil, 

 or tinged with colours different from thofe of its own fpecies, this is not 

 only vain and ridiculous in itfelf, but pernicious in its confequences. It is 

 not, however, at all times to be guarded againft, without a long acquaint- 

 ance with the fubjects under notice, efpecially where their fpecific charac- 

 ters are lefs defined and lefs obvious, as is the cafe with mofl of the plants 

 whch conflitute the moll numerous and extenfive clafs, the Cryptogamia. 



The incongruity of names, given to thefe and other fubjects in Natural 

 Hiftory, is a {tumbling block in the way of fcience ; it is an evil, however, 

 that mull at prefent be difpenfed with, "becaufe it is an unavoidable one; 

 for when feveral men, ftrangers to each other, and in different kingdoms, 

 are engaged in the fame purfuit; fuppofe the fame object fhould fall into 

 the hands of each, and fuppofe the object unknown to all of them; each 

 finds it neceffary to give it a name, at leaft a fpecific one; and he willies to 

 give it fuch an one, as will be fomeway or other expreffive of the object 

 under review; this will be given according to his own idea, or apprehen- 

 fion both of the object, and of the name. ' But men's ideas and apprehen- 

 fions vary as much as their faces vary, fo that under the above circumftances, 

 if the fame object lhould fall under the notice of twenty different defcri- 

 bers or difcoverers, that five out of the twenty fhould denominate it by the 

 fell" lame term, is little lefs than impoffible. This is the principal caufe 



of 



