\ THORNTON’S NEW ILLUSTRATION OF LINNEUS’S SEXUAL SYSTEM. 
a lamentable expence of memory. Not- 
withstanding he had expressly declared 
in his first proposals, and had repeated 
more than once in the progress of the 
work, that his object was to trace, in as 
perspicuous a manner as possible, the 
philosophical principles of botany ; he now, 
m 1802, gravely tells his subscribers, 
that “ when he first Jaunched forth his 
New Illustration of the Sexual System of 
Linneus, the horizon was overcast, and 
the sciences and arts checked by the ex- 
pences and uncertainties of a war involv- 
ing the whole of Europe:” that there- 
fore ‘no intention could at that time be 
entertained of entering into philosophical 
disquisitions : but the prospect of returning 
peace, and the revival of thearts, dawning, 
he was persuaded by several well-wishers 
to what they were pleased to call a national 
work, to enlarge his views,which were be- 
fore, of necessity, so extremely limited; 
and considering the high respectability of 
the body of his subscribers, and the natu- 
ral inherent spirit of the British nation, he 
has consented to their wishes, and trusts, 
and hopes, that in so doing, he has the 
more satisfied the large bulk of subscribers, 
fully able to appreciate the different va- 
lues of a full or a contracted illustration of 
the most lovely of the sciences.”’ 
So true is the observation of the poet, 
that 
*« Nature to all things fixed the limits fit, 
And wisely curbed proud man’s pretending 
wit. 
As on the land while here the ocean gains, 
In other parts it leaves wide sandy plains ; 
‘Thus in the soul while memory prevails, 
‘The solid power of understanding fails ; 
When beams of warm imagination play, 
The memory’s soft figures melt away.” 
He at length proposed that the work 
should extend to about twenty numbers. 
Seventeen are now before us; and we 
are called upon by our duty to the pub- 
lic to state how much is done, and to ap- 
preciate, to the best of our judgment, 
how well it is done. Knowing nothing 
of Dr. Thornton, but through the me- 
dium of his publications, and total stran- 
gers to all his connexions, we trust that 
our minds are free from every improper 
bias ; and as we shall nothing extenuate, 
so we shall set down nought in malice. 
The first section of twelve pages con- 
tains only the plan of the work. The 
second is devoted to an explanation of 
the three kingdoms of nature, and a fan- 
‘ciful comparison of the great families of 
’ plants, with the different ranks of civilized 
875 
society, translated with little variation 
from the Systema Nature. The whole 
would scarcely have filled two pages, 
but to swell it to the bulk of four, it is 
stuffed with two quotations from Milton, 
with a long note from Aristotle and Ci- 
cero, and a pious address to the Deity 
from Fenelon, which, having like Bayes’s 
prologue, an universal fitness, would do 
equally well for any part of any system 
of natural history, that ever has been, or 
ever will be published. ’ 
Hitherto we have been only in the » 
porch. The third section conducts us 
over the threshold, and introduces us 
into the vestibule of this magnificent na- 
tional edifice. It is entitled, The different 
hinds of seed vessels, and informs us in a 
style of beautiful simplicity, that as the 
crysalis of the silk worm is included ina 
golden tomb, so is the seed guarded in a_ 
similar manner: and that for the farther 
purpose of the protection of the seed, 
nature has sometimes filled this vessel 
with air, as in the bladder senna ; or with 
down, as in the bean and cotton plant.” 
The pericarp is distinguished, as usual, 
into the capsule, silique, legume, follicle, 
drupe, pome, berry, and strobile, with 
the addition of the nut, which Dr. Thorn- 
ton exultingly tells us, twice within the 
compass of three lines, he has considered 
as a distinct species of pericarp ; adding 
that the almond, which, according to 
Linneus, is a dry drupe, perhaps would 
better follow the ensign of the nut. ‘The 
berry (bacca) he defines, a pulpy seed. 
vessel, enclosing numerous seeds, dispers- 
ed throughout the pulp. By inserting 
the word numerous he excludes: all the 
monospermous berries of Linneus, as 
well as the fruit of the rubus, which, 
according to Linneus, is a compound 
berry, having a single seed embedded in 
the pulp of each of its component parts. 
And to make it evident that his idea of 
a bacca is alike inaccurate and imperfect, 
he has figured, as an instance of it, the 
fruit, in popular language, called a straw- 
berry; which Linneus terms an improper 
bacca, and which, according to his own 
definition, is not a bacca atall. 
The fifth section enumerates the com- 
ponent paris of the seed, to illustrate 
which Dr. ‘lhornton, following almost 
every author from the days of Grew, has 
chosen the common garden bean, But 
with Grew before him, whois a model 
for clearness of method and perspicuity 
of description, though his style is now 
become obsolete and apparently stiff, he 
