PREFACE. IX 



takes. But I must here stop^ for I have never aspired 

 to the reputation of a critic, and to the equivocal friend- 

 ship with the rest of the world which such commenta- 

 tors generally have. I have only been induced to point 

 out these faults, because it appeared to me that the 

 writer alluded to/though now numbered with the dead, 

 has left a reputation tending to deprave the scientific 

 habits of such medical students, and they, I believe, 

 are not a few, as read his works. I am also checked 

 by the hint of Le Sage : "En verite sil y a bien de mau- 

 vais auteurs, il faut convenir q'il y a encore plus de 

 mauvais critiques."* I, therefore, conclude by sug- 

 gesting, that if an exact science require for the relief of 

 its student some dilution with the works of the imagi- 

 nation ; instead of corrupting it with mere notions and 

 exaggerations, it would be much better for the student 

 to resort to productions of the fif st merit, and to hold in 

 one hand his System of Anatomy, and in the other a 

 Milton, or a Waverly Novel. 



I should be extremely sorry to be understood as doubt- 

 ing the capability of the British anatomists to write a 

 good treatise on this subject. I indeed feel persuaded 

 of the contrary; and, therefore, only mean that as yet 

 they have not, in this particular, done justice to them- 

 selves, or to the literary reputation of their country. 

 Any other opinion w^ould be great injustice to them, 'and 

 would also be ingratitude for acts of friendship and civi- 

 lity received from many illustrious and enlightened in- 

 dividuals whom the profession is proud to own; and al- 



* In truth, if there are many wretched authors, one must confess 

 that there are many more wretched critics. Gil Bias. 



