﻿Shepard/s Treatise on Mineralogy. 173 



After what has been already said, it is unnecessary to attempt 

 to show that the little volume under consideration ever was in- 

 tended "to go alone as a complete treatise." It does not even 

 advance to the most voluminous department in mineralogy, viz. 

 the descriptions of the species ; much less does it pretend to col- 

 lect from other sciences the contributions they afford, in order to 

 complete our knowledge of minerals. 



The review charges me with an inconsistency on the ground of 

 nomenclature, for using Count Bournon's name Jibrolite, (which 

 it declares to be obsolete,) while I at the same time set aside a 

 number of well established names to make room for those of my 

 own construction. But it is impossible that the name Fibrolite 

 can in any proper sense be said to be obsolete. It is indeed true 

 that it was applied some time ago to a scarce substance, which 

 until lately, was rarely seen in our collections and consequently 

 but seldom referred to in the books, although its description has 

 been constantly repeated in all mineralogical authorities. On 

 what ground then could it be thought that I should drop this 



erties will not lead to the name sought, other information relating to form, struc- 

 ture, fracture, lustre, &c. is added, in a column still exterior to the first. 



As the foregoing method was contrived with a view to bring minerals under a 

 determinative process, analogous to that practiced in botany, (see Treatise, first 

 edition, 1832, p. 138,) it is plain that the claim lately put forth by Berzelus in 

 behalf of M. Nordenskceld, that he was the first person who has made this at- 

 tempt, is not well founded.* The title of this latter work is " Utkast till <tt examti- 

 nations syg m for minerallerna /" and Berzelius says of it, that it is the first 

 work ever published which has it principally IQ view to enable beginners to de- 

 termine the species of minerals, as the sexual system of Linnaeus does, in the case 

 of plants. (Rap. An. Prog, de la Chim. 1844, p. 144.) 



* A similar method was employed as early as 1771 by Dr. John Hill in his Mineralogy, 

 entitled A vmrk on Fossils, arranged according 1o their obvious characters, with their History 

 and Description under the articles of Form, Hardness, Weight, Surface, Colour and Quali- 

 ties: The place of their Production, their Uses and Distinctive English and Classical Latin 

 Names. 8vo. London, 1771. As the work is of considerable interest in the history of 

 the science, especially of the natural history method, we give the following quotations 

 from the preface. 



" From these determinations alone of our senses, will be given a detail of the differences 

 we find in fossils, under the heads of Form, Hardness, Weight, Surface, Colour, and Qual- 

 ities, as distinguished by the taste, smell, or touch. These distinctive marks will be dis- 

 posed separately in so many columns ; and to these will be added two more for the his- 

 tory of the bodies, comprehending the place where they are found and uses to which they 

 serve. Thus the few words in our six first columns read together, will give the specific 

 character of every fossil." "The purpose of the book' 1 is declared to be, "to lay down 

 an arrangement of fossils ; founded on their obvious characters and sensible qualities, ac- 

 cording to which they may be known and disposed in method, without the skill of Chem- 

 istry, or the fatigue of Experiments; without furnaces or aqua fortis." The plan here 

 indicated was carried out as perfectly as the stale of the science then admitted. Th 

 Preface is a very lucid and philosophical exposition of the views taught by the school of 

 the German mineralogist, Mohs. **• ®. ^ r# 



