4'1-t Mr. W. S. Macleu}' u)i the Di/iiig Struggle 



the word iico to be printed in italics. The little word only is, 

 it may be observed, foisted in here with his usual honesty by 

 Dr. Fleming; and as these four letters involve the whole of 

 the question, I shall cite the passage from which this worthy 

 quotes, at full length. " Animals have been divided into ver- 

 tebrated and unvertebrated. Now this division, as M. Cuvier 

 perceived, errs more in its nature, of which we have already 

 exposed the defects, than in its particular relation to zoology. 

 The objection to it is not that it is contrary to truth, but that 

 it does not state enough, and that the young naturalist, 

 })lacing full reliance on it, may be led to conceive that animals 

 have been formed on only two distinct plans. Had the animal 

 kingdom however been divided into radiatedand not radiated, 

 or into aiinulose and not aniiulose, both of these methods would 

 have been equally applicable with that proposed by the cele- 

 brated author of the Histoire Naturelle dcs Animaux sa7is Ver- 

 tebres," (p. 208). I repeat that our D.D. is a most able Twist- 

 text. 



But animals are only vertebral and invertebral, says the 

 Dominie; and the proof is, that you, Mr. MacLeay, are "con- 

 vinced of the existence of only two plans in the animal king- 

 dom, because you acknowledge that the Vcrtchrata are the 

 perfection of one plan of organization, as the Anmdosa may be 

 of another." Now granting this to be a perfectly legitimate 

 Scotch scquitur ; why may not the two plans I am thus proved 

 to be convinced of, be annulose and not annulose, as well 

 as vertebral and invertebral ? Let the Reverend Padre tell me 

 why. To talk therefore of there being only tivo certain divisions 

 in the animal kingdom, however convenient for the dichoto- 

 mizing Minister of Flisk, is rank nonsense; when we can just 

 as truly and as easily divide animals into asses and not asses. 



The editor of the Quarterly indeed seems to have been 

 bewildered by Dr. Fleming's positives and negatives, and the 

 high-sounding title of " The Dichotomous System." Yet the 

 secret of this wonderful discovery lies in the compass of a nut- 

 shell, as this editor will perhaps comprehend when he happens 

 to consider, that if a law were passed extinguishing all quar- 

 terly publications, those that would remain would not be 

 quarterly. 



Discriminate objects this method manifestly does ; but Dr. 

 Fleming says, moreover, " that it accomplishes as much" in 

 the way ofexhibiting the affinities of objects, as one system can 

 effect. He might with equal reason have said that it accom- 

 plishes more; for can any man in his senses honestly state 

 his belief, that a system proceeding entirely and essentially on 

 the plan of division can favour conjunctions at all? Why the 



verv 



