C E S 



676 



C E S 



Cessioa. \&r dress, called the dyvours habit, unless the court 

 'it^-V^ dispense with this mark of ignominy, which they ge- 

 nerally do. See Heineccius ad Pandect, lib. xlii. tit. 

 3 ; Erskine's Insi. of the Law of Scotland, book iv. 

 tit. 3. 26, 27.; Bell's Comment, on the Bankr. Lam, 

 book v. ch. 5. (z) 



CESSION, in a legal sense, signifies an act 

 whereby a person surrenders up, and transmits to 

 another, a right which belonged to himself. 



In the ecclesiastical law, cession denotes the void- 

 ing of one benefice by taking another. For, by 

 statute 21 Hen. VIII., if any one having a bene- 

 iice of L. 8 per annum, or upwards, according to 



the present valuation in the king's books, accepts 

 of any other, without dispensation, the first shall be 

 adjudged void by cession. When an incumbent is 

 made a bishop, all the benefices he before held be- 

 come void by consecration, unless he obtain a dis- 

 pensation. When a benefice becomes void by con- 

 secration, the king is entitled to present, for that 

 time, who ever happens to be patron : In the case 

 of voidance by cession, the patron may present. (zV 



CESTRUM, a genus of plants of the class Pen- 

 tandria, and order Monogynia. See BOTANY, p. 143. 



CESTUS. See the article ATHLETE, vol. ui* 

 p. 47.. 



Oestrum^ 



Ct'btUS. 



CETOLOGY. 



Cetology. * HE animals called Cetacea,*vr Cetaceous Animals, 

 v * -Y^""^ constitute the last order of the class MAMMALIA, or 

 Cetacea mammiferous animals, in most of the modern systems 

 formed into of Zoology ; especially in those of Linne, Blumen- 

 4 separate bach, and Cuvier ; while, in the writings of the older 

 <tas9* naturalists, they have been regarded as an order of 



fishes. A more attentive examination of their inti- 

 mate structure has, however, proved the impropriety 

 of both these arrangements ; and seems to point out 

 the necessity of forming these animals into a distinct 

 and independent class. 



They resemble fishes in almost nothing but their 

 habitations while they are distinguished from those 

 animals by the structure of their atlantai or anterior 

 extremities ; by the form and position of their tail ; 

 by their mode of breathing ; and by producing their 

 young alive, and suckling them by teats. On the 

 other hand, while they possess the respiratory and 

 generative organs of quadrupeds, they are essentially 

 discriminated from these by the form of their bo- 

 dies ; by their total want of sacral extremities, or 

 hind feet ; by the peculiar structure of their tail ; 

 and by that characteristic mechanism attached to 

 their organs of respiration, which gives them the 

 power of ejecting through appropriate outlets the 

 water received into their mouths while swimming, or 

 seizing their prey. 



efinition CETOLOGY, then, is that department of ZOOLOGY, 

 ofCetology. which treats of the structure, economy, and history 

 of cetaceous animals, or of whales, and other inhabi- 

 tants of the deep, which resemble these in anatomical 

 structure. 



Aristotle. As ^ ew of these animals appear to have been known 

 to the ancients,, we meet with but little respecting 

 them in the writings of the first naturalists. Both 

 Aristotle and Pliny, however,, mention several of 

 those species with which we are now most intimately 

 acquainted. Thus, the former, in his Historia Ani- 

 malium, lib. iii. cap. 12. speaks of the great or Green- 

 land whale, under the name Mturrtx^le?, while^ in the 

 twelfth chapter of his sixth book, he treats of the 

 Dolphin, AJ/P/S, and the Porpesse, Qaxmvu. Though 

 this writer gives us but an imperfect account of all 

 those species, and mixes a good deal of the marvel- 

 lous with his descriptions, he is much more to be re- 

 lied on than any of his successors of the ancient 

 school. . In particular, his natural history of the 

 dolphin is the most faithful of any that we find in 



ancient writers, and proves, that Aristotle, either ecolo 

 from his own observation, or that of his assistants, \ ^-y- 

 was well acquainted with the true form and manners 

 of the animal which he describes. 



The Natural History of the Elder Plin,y abounds ,. 

 in observations on several species of whales, especial- 

 ly the great whale, which he describes in the 37th 

 chapter of his eleventh book, under the name of 

 Musculus ; the Dolphin (Dclphinus), lib. ix. cap. 9.; 

 the Porpesse (Titrsio), in the 8th ch. ; and the Gram- 

 pus (Oraz), in the 6th chap, of the same book. We 

 are by no means certain, however, that modern writers 

 are correct in assigning the Musculus of Pliny as a 

 synonime of the Mysticcte, or great whale ; for he 

 speaks of the former as preceding another species, 

 which he calls Baleena, by way of leader ; and, in se- 

 veral parts of his work, he denominates the largest 

 species of whale Cete. The descriptions and rela- 

 tions of Pliny, respecting these animals, are exceed- 

 ingly fanciful, and show that disposition towards the 

 marvellous for which this naturalist is so celebrated. 

 His account of the dolphin, in particular, is little 

 better than a collection of fables, gleaned from the 

 poets and travellers of the time ; but, on the other 

 hand, his account of the grampus, and the contests 

 between this species and the large whales, is very re- 

 spectable, and tolerably authentic. 



Among the earlier naturalists of modern times, 

 many have treated, more or less minutely, of ceta- &c. 

 ceous animals, as Aldrovandi, in that part of his 

 general work entitled Ceta ; Gesner, in his work De 

 Piscibus; Johnston, in his Historia Naturalis De 

 Piscibus et Cetis ; and Rondelet, in his Histoire des 

 Poissons. Of these, the most respectable is Ronde- 

 let, whose work is still quoted with approbation by 

 most succeeding writers. He does not, however, 

 add much to our stock of information respecting 

 the number of species, though he mentions some, 

 especially the Gibbar, not known to the older natu- 

 ralists. The work of Aldrovandi is perhaps the most 

 imperfect and inaccurate of the four. He quotes 

 largely, and apparently with implicit credit, from- 

 the writings of Aristotle and Pliny, and even from 

 the fictions of the poets. 



Among the naturalists of the 17th century, we \\riU U ghby 

 may mention three of our countrymen of distinguish, 

 ed eminence in most branches of the science, Wil- 

 lughby, Ray, and Sibbald. Mr Willughby's work, 





