782 



many times tried to raise plants from seed, but have never again 

 been successful. 



Thomas Bentall. 



Halstead, March, 1847. 



Notice of ' Cyhele Britannica ; or British Plants and their Geo- 

 graphical Relations. By Hewett Cottrell Watson.' 



The time has been, and the fact is faithfully chronicled in our bo- 

 tanical publications, when the entire energies of the British botanist 

 were devoted to the acquisition of specimens, and the test of merit 

 was the possession of the greatest number of species. So very blind- 

 ly was this propensity for numerical superiority carried out, and so 

 totally unaccompanied by any competent botanical knowledge, that 

 in the early days of the 'Phytologist' the same plant veri/ frequently/ 

 occurred under two names in the lists then forwarded for publication, 

 sometimes under three names, and once under four names, and the 

 lists sent us for publication were by no means extraordinary instances 

 of ignorance. The two Botanical Societies at that time distributed 

 plants with equal inattention to correct nomenclature, so that blun- 

 ders became disseminated through the country under the grave and 

 pompous sanction of scientific authority. Indeed, the blundering of 

 the Societies may have exercised an influence in increasing the blun- 

 dering of writers. As regards Societies, however, a great improve- 

 ment has taken place, and great care is now taken to see that the 

 plants distributed are correctly nanied. 



There is also another cause for this general carelessness and inac- 

 curacy in many ; it is the opprobrium which shallow lecturers endea- 

 vour to cast on the " mere species-man." Of all inventions for con- 

 cealing ignorance, this is, in every respect, the most deceptive and the 

 most baneful : the intimate and perfect knowledge of species is the 

 basis of Natural History ; and those men who hide their own igno- 

 rance by a subterfuge so flimsy, however they may lecture, however 

 they may write, they can never be worth hearing or reading; for they 

 possess not that foundation of facts on which all available superstruc- 

 ture of conclusions must be based. As a general writer who confines 

 his labours to words of three letters can only find an audience of 

 children, so he who writes on Natural History without a knowledge 

 of species will only be read by babies in the science, who take com- 

 fort in finding an author as ignorant as themselves. We know from 



