— 159 — 
) In seiner Schrift Hortus Cliffortianus 1737. 
°”) Er schreibt an Haller: «Horreo proelium intrare, cum, sive 
vincor sive vinco, tamen maculor; quis triumphavit absque vulnere? 
Semper aliquid haret.» (5. April 1737. Epistolae ad Hallerum I], 
p- 257) und bei späterer Gelegenheit erfahren wir, dass er hierin 
einem Rate von Boeerhave folgte: «Nostrum speculum, Bcoerhavius, 
nunquam respondebat. Memor sum illius effati ad me; dixit mihi: 
nunquam debes respondere ad apologias, et hoc mihi promittas; pro- 
misi; et inde maxime profeci.» (Brief vom 13. Sept. 1748. Epistols 
ad Hallerum, vol. II, p. 409.) 
*) Wir zitieren nach der Uebersetzung von Smith (Vol. II, 
p. 256f.) .... that I do not entirely agree with you as to the practi- 
cability of your system, founded on the sexes of plants. But it 
never came into my mind to enter into any controversy with you 
. on the subject. Real lovers of science are necessarly united, in 
bonds of friendship, with those by whom science isadvanced. Thus I 
was already much attached to you before you ever thought of me... 
Having said thus much, you -will readily perceive that whenever, 
in our future correspondence, from which I antiecipate so much 
pleasure, I may express any opinions different from yours, it will 
be in the secrecy of friendship, and not for public exposure. So, 
in my recent pamphlet (gemeint ist Hallers Dissertation de metho- 
dico botanices studio), I have treated of your system in such a 
manner, as neither to detract from your reputation, nor to condemn 
your sentiments. I have merely indicated some difficulties, which, 
in the application of your method to practice, might hereafter be 
obviated.» 
In ganz ähnlichem Sinne äussert sich Haller in einem Briefe 
an Gessner vom 16. Jan. 1738: «Contra eum (Linne) seripserunt 
aut scribent Siegesbeckius Petropoli et Ludwig Lipsis...... ego 
nollem et possim famam minuere viri in rem herbariam arden- 
tissimi.» 
®) Erschienen 1742. In neuer Bearbeitung 1768 unter dem 
Titel Historia stirpium indigenarum Helvetice publiciert. 
“) Brief an Haller vom 18. Juli 1743 (Epistole ad Hallerum 
Vol. II, p. 112): «Quod ad opus ipsum attinet, est certe immortale, 
propriis observationibus utpote totum quantum constans; utinam 
haberemus plures ejusmodi floras, eodem studio elaboratas.» Interessant 
ist es auch, im gleichen Briefe zu sehen, wie Linn die in diesem 
Werke enthaltene Bearbeitung der Pilze, auf die Haller viel Arbeit 
verwendet hatte, beurteilt (l. c. p. 114): «In Fungis novum orbem 
detexisti, demonstrasti viam per hanc sylvam, quam nullus ante in- 
trare potuit certo tramite; et Dillenii et Michelii Fungi nulli sunt; 
Hallero debemus omnia in his; opus immensi laboris.» 
Es ist daher nicht recht verständlich, wie es kam, dass Haller 
