40 Review of Cleaveland’s Mineralogy. 
of similar properties; and from not giving due prominence to 
those which are peculiar, and therefore distinctive, they fre- 
quently fail to leave a distinct impression of any thing on the 
mind, and thus, in the midst of what is called by the writers of 
.this school a full oryctognostic picture, a student is sometimes 
absolutely bewildered. _ : 
Some of the modern French writers, availing themselves of 
Mr. Werner’s very able delineation of the external characters 
of minerals, have selected such as are most important, most 
striking, distinctive, and interesting ; and drawing a spirited and 
bold sketch, have left the minuter parts untouched : such @ 
picture, although less perfect, often presents a stronger like- 
ness, and more effectually arrests the attention. 
This is the method of description which has been, as we 
think, happily adopted, to a great extent, by Mr. Cleaveland, 
erner, availing himself of the similarities in the 
external appearance of minerals, has (excepting the metals) 
arranged them also upon this plan, without regard to their con- 
stitution ; that is, fo their reat nature, or at least, making this 
wholly subservient to the other: this has caused him, in some 
instances, to bring together things which are totally unlike in 
their nature, and, in other instances, to separate those which 
were entirely similar. Whatever may be said in favour of 
such a course, considered as a provisional one, while chemical 
analysis was in its infancy, the mind can never rest satisfied 
with any arrangement which contradicts the real nature of 
things; in a word, the composition of minerals is the only cor- 
rect foundation for their classification. This classification has 
been adopted by several of the ablest modern French writers. 
«It is believed,” (says Professor Cleaveland, Preface, p. 7.) 
«that the more valuable parts of the two systems may be 
incorporated, or, in other words, that the peculiar descriptive 
language of the one may, in a certain degree, be united to the 
accurate and scientific arrangement of the other.” 
* This union of descriptive language and scientific arrange- 
ment has been effected, with good success, by Broncyiart, in 
his System of Mineralogy—an elementary work, which seems 
better adapted both to interest and instruct, than any which 
SS 
