266 



acquaintance, antl many have I known whose love of Nature's beauties 

 was as enthusiastic as it was modest, unassuming, and unaffected. 

 Perhaps there may be occasionally professional aspirers, who, anxious 

 to gain the top of the tree, may be careless of disarranging its branches, 

 if the rustling they make only brings them into notice ; such a casual 

 disturbance may knock the dry sticks about our heads, and call for 

 Mr. Watson's reprobation ; but such an annoyance from notoriety-seek- 

 ing, if that be the only motive, is not likely to be of long continuance, 

 nor are the whole body of practical botanists to be held responsible 

 for it. Without insisting upon the principles of phrenological deve- 

 lopment in the matter, I should judge the feelings of the botanical 

 rambler to be instigated first by the love of novelty, for this is common 

 to us all, and to " range in fresh fields and pastures new," or gather 

 for the first time, as Lucretius says, " new flowers," is exciting even to 

 the uninitiated. 



" 'Tis not for nothing that we life pursue, 

 It pays our hopes with something still that's ne^v!^ — Dryden. 



The love of knowledge follows upon the excitement of novelty, and 

 we hasten to understand what we have discovered j and surely it is 

 but cold comfort in return for our efforts to be told that instead of 

 having progressed in knowledge, we only show our deficiency in rea- 

 soning powers, but have the bump of notoriety well developed ! It 

 would, I think, be but charitable to infer that in most instances truth 

 is sought after ; for if a plant be found really not answering to re- 

 corded descriptions, I cannot but think it deserves to be noted, even 

 if it eventually turns out that it is the description only which requires 

 correction. Instead, therefore, of Mr. Watson's too sweeping condem- 

 nation of " species-making," as he terms it, I would propose a resolu- 

 tion by way of amendment, restricting all young botanists from pub- 

 lishing new names till they had studied the science for at least five 

 years, and preserved their specimens for examination and criticism. 

 But I think if a person has made any class, family, or genus, his pe- 

 culiar study for upwards of five years, it is but fair to infer that he 

 has found out something, and if so, let us by all means have the bene- 

 fit of his labours, even if a change of names or a new species does re- 

 sult in consequence. 



That the term species, as Mr. Watson suggests, requires a more ex- 

 tended definition, or recasting, may be correct ; or rather perhaps the 

 characters on which a species is supposed to depend, are not the 



