1(0 IMRODUCTIOxN. 



more or less corrected them : which was called 

 a mutilation by some worshipers of his Errors. 

 Most of them have still insisted on the pervert- 

 ed axiom that the Genus gives the character ! 

 which for them meant that the Linnean bundle 

 of plants, called a Genus, was to afford a com- 

 mon loose generic definition, whatever might 

 be the essential features peculiar to each Sp. 

 wrongly put in the bundle. I was compelled to 

 transpose this axiom, by maintaining that tJw 

 character makes the Genus, or that no proper 

 Genus can exist without a character applying to 

 all the species it contains. This principle fully 

 applies also to Tribes or families, Orders and 

 Classes ; altho' quite neglected by the actual 

 Botanists, who do for them what Linneus did 

 for genera. 



- My own improvements in finding discrimina- 

 ting characters for all generic and other groups 

 extend chiefly to frame none but positive and 

 exclusive characters of a permanent nature in 

 contrast — and besides to shorten long descrip- 

 tions by avoiding repetitions, or merely stating 

 how a Genus may differ from another, which 

 always implies that they agree in every thing 

 else. 



Every Genus ought to find a place in the 

 natural method, when properly known : none but 

 those partialy described can be doubtful. Hence 

 Jussieu was wrong in having so many Genera 

 inserta sedis, which no one could find by his 

 method, with so many G. improperly added to 

 families ; while both were often types of new 

 families since estabhshed. But Linneus, Adan- 

 son, Necker . . . did worse in forming many 

 families of plants loosely connected by habit 

 rather than the fructification. 



