Review of Cleaveland’s Mineralogy. 45 
cheeks, while his respiration proceeds without embarrassment 
through the nostrils, he will need no other instrument than 
the common blowpipe. Indeed it is a truly admirable instry- 
ment, instantly giving us the effect of very powerful furnaces, 
the heat being entirely under command, the subject of opera- 
tion and all the changes ip full view, aud the expense and bulk 
of the instrument being such that every one may possess it, 
and carry it about his person. 
The chapter on the principles of arrangement is worthy of 
all praise. This difficult subject is here discussed with such 
clearness, comprehensiveness, and candour, as prove the au- 
thor to be completely master of his subject; and we are per- 
suaded, that, on this topic, no author can be studied with 
more advantage. We forbear to extract, because the whole 
should bevattentively perused in connexion, and scarcely ad- 
mits of abridgement. We entirely agree with Professor 
Cleaveland, as we have already said, that the chemical compo- 
sition of minerals is the only just foundation of their arrange- 
ment ; that next in importance is the crystalline structure, in- 
cluding a knowledge of the primitive form, and integrant mole-. 
cule ; and last and least important, in fixing the arrangement, 
are the external characters: these last should be only provi- 
sionally employed, where the two first are not ascertained, or 
the second is not applicable. When the arrangement is once 
made, we may, however, and we commonly shall, in describing 
minerals, pursue precisely the reverse order; the external 
characters will usually be mentioned first, the crystalline cha- 
racters next, and the chemical last of all. In description, the 
external characters are often the most valuable ; if judiciously 
selected and arranged, they will always prove of the most es- 
sential service, and can rarely be entirely dispensed with. 
With regard to the nomencraTore of minerals, we feelingly 
unite with Professor Cleaveland in deploring the oppressive 
redundancy of synonymes. Few minerals have only one 
name, and usually they have several. With Count Bournon 
Wwe agree, that the discoverer of a snieneh has the exclusive 
right of naming it, and that the name once given should not be 
changed without the mest cogent reasons. What then shall 
