of the Dichotomous Sj/stem. 433 



but, I suppose, that, trusting to his universally applicable 

 binary system, he knew that editors must be either asleep or 

 awake, and with cautious modesty preferred to catch the King 

 of the Quarterly napping. So liir in this respect he seems to 

 have succeeded, that a considerable part of his article is com- 

 posed of verbatim extracts from "The Philosophy of Zoology." 

 As for me, I certainly would have consigned the author of 

 this Review to the contempt he deserves, if he had not con- 

 trived to get it inserted in so respectable a periodical. But now 

 I must confess, that the minister's venom becomes more likely 

 to poison the minds of persons not versed in natural history, 

 than it could have done if conveyed through the pages of" The 

 Philosophy of Zoology." 



Dr. Fleming's scientific history seems to be this : — Confined 

 to his parish in a remote part of the kingdom, he took up 

 zoology to be a resource against ennui, as many others have 

 done before him ; and measuring Nature by his own capability 

 of observing her, he stumbled on the Binary System, probably 

 because the ins and outs of the pulpit appeared to him to be 

 the most interesting division of his flock ; and because the 

 minister and his precentor furnished him with the most obvious 

 subdivision of the contents of the pulpit. With the scanty 

 museum afforded by his glebe, he came in due pi'ocess of time, 

 as may be seen from the Quarterly, to distinguish accurately the 

 hare from the rabbit, and the dwarf from the common elder. 

 Practical knowledge being thus acquired, and some theory 

 from such rare authors as Linn^us, Cuvier, and Lamarck, our 

 naturalist set up as a contributor of Natural History articles to 

 the Edinburgh Encyclopedias; a class of woi'ks, that, so far as 

 we have yet seen, has presented us with nothing in zoology but 

 stale compilations miserably travestied. Flattered by a success 

 in this drudgery, which few naturalists would have contested 

 with him, he then compiled his "Philosophy of Zoology;" a 

 book which rests its sole claim to distinction on the Doctor's 

 formerly sujiposed discovery of the Dichotomous System. It 

 so happened, as before mentioned, that by two or three words 

 I had previously demolished this system ; and now the " phi- 

 losophy" of our zoologist, on finding it out, will not allow him 

 to forgive me. Had this man more depth, my task in quench- 

 ing him might have been a difficult one; for you know 1 have 

 no extensive libraries to refer to: but as no part of his attack 

 that is not marked with the stamp of ignorance claims a more 

 respectable character than that of superficial ribaldry, I am 

 not afraid to take up the gauntlet he has so foolishly thrown 

 down. 



In the first place I must inform him, that it is a matter of 

 N.S. Vol.7. No. 42. jM7<t'l«30. 3 K the 



