866 
to most readers: and two epistolary 
dissertations are added on the same sub- 
ject, addressed to the author by Mr. 
Bonnet. ‘To Bonnet’s mémoirs on the 
reproduction of the heads of snails, are 
prefixed two memoirs on the same sub- 
ject by Spallanzani; and to the whole, 
are annexed three memoirs on the repro- 
duction of the members of the water 
newt by his Genevan friend. Occasional 
notes by the translator are now also for 
the first time, introduced, with some ge- 
neral preliminary remarks to supply the 
place of other elucidations. ‘The trans- 
lation itself is in this second edition not 
only corrected and revised, but so much 
altered in all its parts as to render it al- 
most a new work: the former errors and 
obscurities are not only generally re- 
moved, but the construction of t] e sen- 
tences is frequently changed, and the 
whole reads much more like an original. 
Still, however, ‘a few imperfections re- 
main, arising partly from the improper 
use of some of the auxiliary verbs which 
our countrymen in the northern part of 
the island are scarcely ever able entirely 
to surmount, and partly from too close 
an adherence to the Italian idiom in ren- 
dering the conjunctive and other par- 
ticles. Insome cases, the meaning must 
be gathered from the connection, and 
not from the literal force of the English 
expression. ‘Thus, when relating the re- 
sult of Pistorini’s experiments on animals 
confined in stagnant air, he tells us, that 
*¢ two animals died as soon as one, though 
Pistorini used the same vessels and ani- 
mals of the same size and species.”’ ‘Vhe 
sentence, detached from the context, 
would direct our attention to the circum- 
stance of their not living longer, whereas 
the wonder was that they lived as long, 
that is, did not die sooner. 
From the notes and introductory ob- 
servations, Mr. Dalzell appears to have 
acquired an extensive acquaintance with 
the subjects discussed in the original 
work, by actual experinrent, as well as 
by extensive reading and close thinking ; 
and we cannot but consider this improv- 
ed edition of the translation as. a valua- 
ble addition to our English stock of phy- 
siological knowledge. The general re- 
sults of the experiments have,’ indeed, 
been so frequently mentioned in different 
publications, that they have now but lit- 
tle attraction on the score of novelty.— 
But still it was desirable that the Eng- 
lish reader should have an opportunity 
NATURAL HISTORY. 
of becoming acquainted with the manner 
in which they were obtained, and with 
the particular details on which they are 
founded. It is equally pleasant and 
instructive, to view the progress of a 
superior mind in its patient researches 
after truth; to follow it throug) its 
miscarriages no less than its successful 
efforts; and to perceive how one step 
suggested another, and either led to a 
conclusion apparently satisfactory, or 
ended in doubt and perplexity. 
The genius of Spallanzani was pene- 
trating and cautious, ardently desirous 
of investivating the secrets of nature, 
and unwilling to rely on first appear- 
ances. Henever formeda decisive judg- 
ment till he had done all m his power to 
survey the subject in all itsrelations: he 
had also a happy facility in diversifying 
his expedients for the acquisition of 
knowledge ; and if at any time he was 
induced to repose ina false theory, his 
mistakes were owing to. the imperfect 
state of knowledge which was common 
to all his contemporaries. His observa- 
tions and reasoning on the effect of stag- 
nant air on animal life, were made before 
the late brilliant discoveries concerning 
the constitution of the atmosphere: we 
cannot wonder, therefore, that he attri- 
buted the death of animals in close yes- 
sels to noxious exhalations from theit 
bodies, and not to a change in the.con-+ 
stituent parts of the air itself. 
His correspondence with Bonnet, and 
his manner of conducting the contro- 
versy with Needham and Buffon, bear 
all the marks of a candid and liberal 
mind. Considering those who were en- 
gaged in the same pursuits with himself 
as auxiliaries and not as rivals, he pointed 
out their mistakes wih an amiable deli- 
cacy and a kind solicitude not to wound 
their personal feelings. But, as is too 
common with men of letters, in his judg. 
ment of those whose studies took a dif- 
ferent direction from his own, he was 
supercilious and unjust. Of Linneus 
and his followers, he always spoke with 
contempt, and servilely copying Buffon, 
absurdly distinguished them by the dis- 
paraging appellation of Nomenclators. 
But if he had not arrogantly disdained 
to profit by the talents and labours of a 
min, who will be esteemed by impartial 
posterity, greatly his superior in the uti- 
lity as well as variety and extent of his 
investigations, he would not have given 
the name of Tremella to a Conterva, 
