232 



ESSAY ON CLASSIFICATION. 



Part I. 



or Greek name, or was advanced by the additional burden of a new nomencla- 

 ture. Another objectionable practice, prevailing quite as extensively also, consists 

 in the change of names, or the modification of the extent and meaning of old ones, 

 without the addition of new information or of new views. If this practice is 

 not abandoned, it will necessarily end in making Natural History a mere matter 

 of nomenclature, instead of fostering its higher philosophical character. Nowhere 

 is this abuse of a useless multiplication of names so keenly felt as in the nomen- 

 clature of the fruits of plants, which exhibits neither insight into vegetable mor- 

 phology, nor even accurate observation of the material facts. 



May we not return to the methods of such men as Cuvier and Baer, who 

 were never ashamed of expressing their doubts in difficult cases, and were always 

 ready to call the attention of other observers to questionable jDoints, instead of 

 covering up the deficiency of their information by high-sounding words ! 



In this rapid review of the history of Zoology, I have omitted several classi- 

 fications, such as those of Kaup and Van der Hoeven, which might have afforded 

 an opportunity for other remarks, but I have already extended this digression 

 far enough to show how the standards I have proposed in my second chapter 

 may assist us in testing the value of the different kinds of groups generally 

 adopted in our classifications, and this was from the beginning my principal object 

 in this inquiry. The next step should now be to apply these standards also to 

 the minor divisions of the animal kingdom, down to the genera and species, and 

 to do this for every class singly, with special reference to the works of mono- 

 graphers. But this is such an herculean task, that it can only be accomphshed 

 by the combined efforts of all naturalists, during many years to come. 



