52 TRANSACTIONS OF THE [JAN. 25, 
edition, 1844, he retains these Latin names as the scientific ones, 
as necessary to ‘‘a systematic idea of the science,’ but adds, ‘the 
shorter trivial names should, however, be retained, as more con- 
venient for common use.’’ In the third edition, 1850, however, 
Prof. Dana discards the whole system, not even retaining the names 
as synonyms. A system of arrangement was adopted that was 
understood to be temporary, while at the end of the work a chemi- 
cal classification was suggested. In the later editions, this last has 
been perfected, and we now have an arrangement easy of reference 
and answering all purposes of classification, but from which all 
traces of the double Latinized forms of the Natural History methods 
have disappeared. This or some similar system is now generally 
followed by writers on mineralogy, much to the satisfaction of 
those who use their works. In 1847, Glocker published his work 
entitled ‘‘Generum et Specierum Mineralium Synopsis.” This is 
perhaps the most successful attempt at a systematic nomenclature 
that has been made. He uses in general a Latinized form of the 
common name for the name of each species, with some descriptive 
word added. For varieties, he adds a third word, as is common in 
other branches of natural history. For instance, under Granatus, 
garnet, he gives three species: 1st. Granatus nobilis, precious gar- 
net ; 2d. Granatus byacinthinus, cinnamon garnet; and 3d. Granatus 
vulgaris, common garnet, and under the latter, the varieties Granatus 
vulgaris fuscus, niger, viridis, flavus, and albidus. The work is 
in Latin, thus going back to the style of the scientific books of the 
last century. Recently, Prof. T. Sterry Hunt has devised a new 
Natural System, suggested indeed as early as 1853, but as he does 
not give us new names for the species, a discussion of it would be 
out of place here. His work is, however, exceedingly interesting, 
and will well repay examination by those who care to go further 
into that side of the general subject. 
In 1728 Dr. John Woodward published a work entitled ‘‘ Fossils 
of all Kinds Digested into a Method, Suitable to their Mutual Re- 
lations and Affinity, ” but it isa description from external characters 
only, and can hardly be called a scientific treatise. The first one 
that really deserves such a name is by the Swedish mineralogist, 
Wallerius, in 1747, which is arranged on a scientific plan, and gives 
us the earliest systematic description of minerals. Cronstedt, 
another Swedish chemist, ten years later gave us a work of much 
greater value, as be brought in chemical relations, as far as was 
possible in the crude state of that science. But few new names 
were added, for the study was still largely from the external side, 
and new species could not be recognized. With the discovery of 
oxygen in 1776, and the real beginning of the science of chemistry, 
a more correct basis for the differentiation of mineral species was 
found. This was aided by the application of scientific crystallo- 
graphy, the first edition of Delisle’s work appearing in 1772, and 
the second, in four volumes, in. 1783. From this date new names 
i li: te a ee i ee 
re 
