NATURAL CLASSIFICATIOJS. 41 



to 1615, all deserving attention : this number 

 was swelled to 18i2 by Necker in 1790, and 

 has been swelling ever since; until Genera are 

 now nearly as numerous as known Species were 

 a. Century ago. 



Adanson ventured to prophesy that botanists 

 would at last be compelled to attend to Genera 

 only, and neglect the Species, both for their 

 number and natural spliting. He was like Lin- 

 neus, Necker and myself (in fact like all acute 

 observers) a strenuous supporter of the doctrine 

 that Species were unlimited, and increasing by 

 the natural process of semination, deviation, 

 variation, hybridation &.c. Whence he conclu- 

 ded that we could hardly ascertain the primi- 

 tive types of species, that many known to an- 

 cient Botanists were lost or no longer found, 

 while new ones were evolved in mountains, 

 groves, fields and gardens. 



The practice of uniting incongruous and un- 

 like plants in the same Genus, has long prevailed 

 and is yet followed by Hooker, Torrey and 

 many eminent botanists, who do not perceive 

 the fallacy of this plan: whereby their species 

 are in fact often real types of overlooked Genera, 

 and their Genera are artificial like the first 

 made by Tournefort and Linneus. 



Botany will never reach perfection till this 

 arbitrary mode of naming and rcfering plants is 

 discarded: and until all the species of a Genus 

 offer similar characters ; as in fact they natur- 

 ally ought to do. The many polymorphous Ge- 

 nera are mere artificial and heterogenous com- 

 binations of unskilfid or wavering Botanists, 

 and not real genera ! 



In some instances these cautious botanistf; 

 appear to be positiv(^lv blind in di<parilit?>, aiid 



1-: 



