os. é wer 
876 
has contrived, if contrivance it can be 
called, to jumble together a mass of mat- 
ter, hike the original chaos, without form 
and void. In the course of our literary 
labours we have seldom met with a more 
striking example of confused conceptions, 
puerile misplaced reflections, slovenly 
construction, andinaccurate, ungramma- 
tical language. In support of part of 
our censure, we appeal without fear of 
contradiction to the following sentence. 
«The pod of the bean, as you have 
before learnt, is a legume composed, of 
two valves, which were the pieces or 
shells, which the bean divides into, Mled 
with the softest down, which appears, 
viewed by the microscope, a clustre of 
blebs or bladders.” 
We have already hinted, that in the pro- 
gress of the work, our author’s memory 
seems to be impaired. We now begin to 
suspect that it was never very strong, 
owing, doubtless, to the impetuous and 
desuitory character of his tmagination; 
for of judgment, as our readers will soon 
be convinced, he has “ a plentiful lack.” 
Through the whole of what he pleases 
to call his Illustration of the Sexual Sy- 
stemof Lmnezus, he considers his readers 
as entirely ignorant of the first princi- 
ples of botany and natural philosophy: 
butthough he torms so mean anopinion of 
their knowledge, he makes them amends 
by attributing to them a flattering acute- 
ness of apprehension, a certain intuitive 
discernment, which enables them to per- 
ceive what he ought to have said, and to 
penetrate into the inmost recesses of his 
mind, when more is meant than meets 
the eyeor ear. He could not otherwise 
have considered them, as having already 
Tearnt that the pod of a bean is a legume 
composed of two valves. For all thathe has 
told them concerning a legume is in the 
last section, and at the distance of little 
more than a single page, where it takes 
‘up not quite two lines, and where nota 
word about the valves is to be found. 
But like a true Englishman he spoils the 
compliment in the same breath. He 
seems to have no doubt of their receiv- 
ing, on his simple authority, as palpable 
an absurdity as ever insulted the com- 
mon sense of mankind ; that these two 
valves of the pod, i. e. the case or cover- 
ing of the bean, were, sometime, he does 
not say when, the pieces or shells into 
which the bean itself divides. 
Of puerile misplaced reflection the fol- 
‘lowing is a sufficient proof. “The bean 
itself naturally divides into two lobes. If 
NATURAL HISTORY. 
you examine the surface of these Jobes 
there will not be found the smallest in- 
equality, all ts be and glossy, where~ 
as the finest polish of human ingenuity 
is extremely rough. Only view the best 
wrought needle, it presents to your eye 
nothing but huge mequalities, whereas 
the works of the Almighty ever manifest 
the most astonishing perfection.” 
Nothing gives us a more sincere and 
lively pleasure than to observe the mind 
of the naturalist animated with a pre- 
vailing rational piety ; but even piety it~ 
self loses much of its venerable character, 
when founded on misconceived ideas, or 
imtroduced on trivial decasions, and out 
of its proper place. 
Of slovenly construction, the last mem- 
ber of the sentence first quoted, begin- 
ning with the second which, is a conspis 
cuous imstance. 
Of inaccurate, ungrammatical lan- 
guage, there is scarcely a page in the 
whole work, where Dr. Thornton gives 
his own words, which weuld not afford 
at least one example. Let the follow. 
ing suffice. 
“ By making a transverse sectionalong 
the lobes, there will be seen on the sur- 
face small vessels interposed among the 
biebs, which even to the naked eye 
has a greener appearance than the other 
parts.’’ 
To form an idea of the perplexity in 
the general arrangement, it would be 
necessary to read the whole section ; but 
we cannot think it worth either our 
time or paper and ink, and we are per 
suaded that no one would thank us 
for giving ourselves the trouble of tran- 
scribing it. 
The sixth section explains the uses of 
the several parts of the seed: and here, 
as according to his own account, he ven- 
tures to differ from other botanists, it is 
fit that he should be permitted to give 
his ideas in his own language, 
“ The pericarp is usually represented, by 
botanists, as solely destined for protection 5 
whereas, its chief and primary use is the 
nourishment of the young seeds. Hence 
the pericarp, or column in tts centre, serves 
the office of placenta to the embryos; the 
seeds being, as we saw before, attached to, 
them by a thread, or pedicle, which bears an 
analogy to the umbilical chord of the feetus, 
80 little do even the subordinate parts of 
creation lose by comparison with the higher. 
«© This chord is very visible in the bean 
and nut, and indeed exists in every plant; 
but, as the embryos increase in growth, this 
attachment is dissolved, and vegetable pase 
