AND CLASSIFICATION. 17 



can appreciate better the application of this no- 

 menclature, because we have something corre- 

 sponding to it in the vernacular. We have, for 

 instance, one name for all the Oaks, but we call 

 the different kinds Swamp Oak, Red Oak. White 

 Oak, Chestnut Oak, etc. So Linnaeus, in his 

 botanical nomenclature, called all the Oaks by 

 the generic name Quercus, (characterizing them 

 by their fruit, the acorn, common to all,) and 

 qualified them as Quercus bicofor, Quercus 

 rubra, Quercus alba, Quercus castanea, etc., 

 etc. His nomenclature, being so easy of ap- 

 plication, became at once exceedingly popular, 

 and made him the great scientific legislator of 

 liis century. He insisted on Latin names, be- 

 cause, if every naturalist should use his own 

 language, it must lead to great confusion, and 

 this Latin nomenclature of double significance 

 was adopted by all. Another advantage of this 

 binominal Latin nomenclature consists in pre- 

 venting the confusion frequently arising from 

 the use of the same name to designate different 

 JUlimals4tt-dL8erent parts of the world, — as, for 

 instance, the name of Robin, used in America to 

 designate a bird of the Thrush family, which is en- 

 tirely different from the Robin of the Old World, 

 one of the warblers, — or of different names for 

 the same animal, as Perch or Chogset or BurgalJ 

 for our Cunner. Nothing is more to be depre 



