Io 
and marble, and it is in the utmost and most exalted exhibition 
of such individual character, order, and use, that all ideality of 
Art exists. The more cautious he is in assigning the right species 
of moss to its favourite trunk, and the right kind of weed to its 
necessary stone ; in marking the definite and characteristic leaf, 
blossom, seed, fracture, colour, and inward anatomy of everything, 
the more truly ideal his work becomes. All confusion of species, 
all careless rendering of character, all unnatural and arbitrary 
association are vulgar, and un-ideal in proportion to their degree.” 
Of the material benefits which the Artist and the Naturalist can 
bestow on each other I need scarcely speak. To the researches 
of the Naturalist, Artists owe every pigment, varnish, and medium 
we possess, and we are always glad to learn from the botanist or 
the chemist how to mix them, so as to preserve them from 
destruction. The figure painter must of a necessity be more or 
less of an anatomist, and the landscape painter must study some- 
thing of natural laws. ‘This is amply proved by the fact that 
Ruskin’s ‘‘ Modern Painters,” avowedly a treatise on Art, affords 
a considerable amount of information on various branches of 
Natural History. Nor does the disciple of Art fail to acquit him- 
self of his acknowledged obligations to Science. The splendid 
treatises on every department of Natural History which are to be 
found in our library would be almost valueless to students were it 
not for the lifelike illustrations with which they are adorned ; 
illustrations which not only reflect the highest credit on the imita- 
tive powers and skilled manij-ulation of the draughtsmen, but 
indicate an amount of acquaintance with the habits of the animals 
represented, that could only have been acquired by lengthened 
and careful study. But advantages of a higher though less 
tangible character cannot fail to result from a close companionship 
between the devotee of Art and the student of Nature. The 
ardent pursuit of any subject, however ennobling in itself, is apt 
to impart an exaggerated view of its importance, and a correspond- 
ing contempt for all other departments of study. Thus the 
Naturalist is apt to look upon the Artist as inexact and unpractical, 
while the Artist in turn is in danger of regarding scientific pursuits 
as of a grovelling character and destructive of lofty aspirations. 
Such prejudices do not stand the test of familiar companionship. 
The Artist learns from the Naturalist those lessons in 
precision and truth which he often needs, and imparts in turn 
views of harmony and environment, which frequently escape the 
more minute observer, while both acquire a higher consciousness 
of Nature considered as a whole. 
To sum up. There is scarcely a science, if we except abstruse 
mathematical or metaphysical sciences, in which pictorial aid is 
not required. Even what has been called the greatest of all 
sciences—astronomy itself—has been largely indebted to the aid 
