1013 



the characters of the Linnsean classes and orders, were to find a mon- 

 oecious or polygamous grass, would he find it ranged under MonoBcia 

 or Polygamia ? Two examples have thus been given of natural or- 

 ders founded by Linnaeus himself, obvious to every sagacious mind, 

 which under this arbitrary artificial scheme are distributed through 

 some half-dozen classes !I Let no more be said of the certainty and 

 infallibility of the artificial scheme ! 



Speaking of the natural system, Mr. Edmonston gives us the two 

 following passages in his last letter, to a comparison of which 1 wish 

 to draw the attention of your readers. " What a combination of dis- 

 jointed things — nay, not only disjointed, but a system affected with 

 fragilitas ossium, where every bone is broken, and nothing to be seen 

 but hei'e a fragment and there a fragment, a little of everything and 

 nothing complete ! Can such a dismembered system, such a collec- 

 tion of debris, be of any real practical use } I should say. No ! " 

 But now turn over a leaf, and the following passage, so admirably in 

 unison with the above, meets your view. " Let it be borne in mind 

 that by these remarks I do not mean to say that the natural system is 

 or ought to be thrown aside ; let it be studied in its proper place, and 

 it will be productive of much and lasting benefit. It can scarcely be 

 otherwise, since it bears the impress of the great minds of a Jussieu, 

 a Brown, a DeCandolle and a Lindley, [and I would add, which Mr. 

 Edmonston forgets, a Linnaeus] ; but let it not be foisted forward 

 where it can only disgust and perplex." What ! — a combination of 

 disjointed things, a system affected w\\h fragilitas ossium, a fragmen- 

 tary mass, a little of everything and nothing complete — of much and 

 lasting benefit, and bearing the impress of so many and great names !!! 

 Surely there must be some mistake here ; such fragmentary systems 

 are not usually the productions of great minds !! Did Linnaeus pro- 

 ject a fragmentary system, after and in preference to his own primary 

 and more perfect system ? Mr. Edmonston has forgotten himself 



A few words on a point I have left unnoticed at the commencement 

 of Mr. Edmonston's letter, and I have done. I have called the Lin- 

 naean system a mere index (but a valuable one) to plants, and this 

 seems to have given great offence to the followers of that school. In 

 examining this question, we must bear in mind that the species and 

 genera are common to all classifications ; these are agreed upon by 

 all ; the difference between the rival systems exists in the higher 

 groups alone — the classes and orders. Now if we confine ourselves 

 to these higher groups, what do we learn of a plant by the Linnsean 

 system ? Simply the number and position of the stamens and pistils 



