HISTORY OF ZOOPHYTES. 



BOOK V. 



OF THE ZOOPHYTES. 



CHAP. I. 



OF ZOOPHYTES IN GENERAL. 



WE now come to the last link in the chain 

 of animated nature, to a class of beings so con- 

 fined in their powers, and so defective in their 

 formation, that some historians have been at a 

 loss whether to consider them as a superior 

 rank of vegetables, or the humblest order of 

 the animated tribe. In order, therefore, to 

 give them a denomination agreeable to their 

 existence, they have been called Zoophytes, a 

 name implying vegetable nature endued with 

 animal life; and, indeed, in some the marks 

 of the animal are so few, that it is difficult to 

 give their place in nature with precision, or to 

 tell whether it is a plant or an insect that is 

 the object of our consideration. 



Should it be asked what it is that consti- 

 tutes the difference between animal and vege- 

 table life ; what it is that lays the line that se- 

 parates those two great kingdoms from each 

 other, it would be difficult, perhaps we should 

 find it impossible, to return an answer. The 

 power of motion cannot form this distinction, 

 since some vegetables are possessed of motion, 

 and many animals are totally without it. The 

 sensitive plant has obviously a greater variety 

 of motions than the oyster or the pholas. The 

 animal that fills the acorn-shell is immovable, 

 and can only close its lid to defend itself from 

 external injury, while the flower which goes by 

 the name of the fly-trap, seems to close upon 

 the flies that light upon it, and that attempt to 

 rifle it of its honey. The animal in this in- 

 stance seems to have scarce a power of self-de- 

 fence ; the vegetable not only guards its pos- 

 sessions, but seizes upon the robber that would 

 venture to invade them. In like manner, the 

 methods of propagation give no superiority to 



the lower rank of animals. On the contrary, 

 vegetables are frequently produced more con- 

 formably to the higher ranks of the creation, 

 and though some plants are produced by cut- 

 tings from others, yet the general manner of 

 propagation is from seeds, laid in the womb of 

 the earth, where they are hatched into the si- 

 militude of the parent plant or flower. But a 

 most numerous tribe of animals have lately 

 been discovered, which are propagated by cut- 

 tings, and this in so extraordinary a manner, 

 that, though the original insect be divided into 

 a thousand parts, each, however small, shall 

 be formed into an animal, entirely resembling 

 that which was at first divided ; in this res- 

 pect, therefore, certain races of animals seem 

 to fall beneath vegetables, by their more im- 

 perfect propagation. 1 



1 There is much less of acumen and solidity in these 

 remarks of our author thaa might have been expected. 

 That there is, to a certain extent, community of feature 

 and character between vegetable bodies and the zoophyte 

 tribes, is at once admitted, for the very name of the lat- 

 ter implies the junction of animal and vegetable charac- 

 teristics in the same individual. But there is never 

 wanting a broad and striking distinction between the 

 zoophyte and the mere vegetable. We may indeed pro- 

 duce plants possessing motion, and seemingly indued 

 with sensibility, but attentive examination and reflection 

 uniformly convince us that such motion and apparent 

 sensitiveness are mere mechanical properties, in nowise 

 the result of a voluntary principle. We may, again, in- 

 stance zoophytes in which, at first view, the vegetable cha- 

 racter is so predominant, and the animal powers so limi. 

 ted, that they scarcely appear to fall within the lowest 

 orders of animated existences. On close examination, 

 however, we discover that their motions are undoubtedly 

 influenced by volition, or will ; and that they have in. 

 st.incts approximating to those of more perfect animals. 

 We readily admit that it requires long and patient obser- 

 vation to distinguish, in many cases, between vegetables 

 and zoophytes ; but we believe no instance could be 

 brought forward in which the question of animality micht 

 not be determined by the presence or absence of a u-itt. 



