58 Bibliographical Notice. 
the English names adopted where the terrible Greek compounds 
would discourage any but an experienced classic. At the same time, 
however true in the main or convenient may be M. Thurmann’s 
method of classifying soils according to their relative friability, his 
subdivisions seem to us rather consequences of the chemical nature 
of the soil than to be themselves of the first importance. From what 
is known of the inorganic constituents of plants, it is surely the 
chemical ingredients which determine the presence or absence, rarity 
or frequency of certain species, quite as much as the so-called ‘ me- 
chanical ’’ conditions. 
Mr. Watson has devoted a useful life and much conscientious 
labour to his favourite branch of botany. Many of our readers will 
remember the ‘‘ Outlines of’? and ‘‘ Remarks upon” the ‘ Geogra- 
phical Distribution of British Plants,’—short sketches that gave 
high promise for the future, which promise is now amply fulfilled. 
These two preliminary volumes were presently followed (in 1843) by 
a more elaborate treatise, somewhat on the scale of M. Lecoq’s. 
This third edition having proved too bulky, Mr. Watson, wisely fore- 
seeing the hopeless length to which that work would have extended, 
proceeded (in 1847) to try a shorter plan in the four volumes by 
which his name has now become so generally known,—the ‘ Cybele 
Britannica.’ 
Of our author’s fitness for his self-imposed task there can be no 
question : we are fortunate in meeting with a writer who, united to a 
rare judgment in weighing evidence, has a most happy method (all 
his own) of condensing particulars. His results are expressed with 
remarkable terseness ; and the caution observed in even suggesting 
any general views, under the present imperfect data, contrasts very 
favourably with the proceedings of many other writers on the subject, 
who have been more ready to advance bold theories than to arrange 
sober facts. 
It is not our object to discuss the plan and arrangement adopted 
by Mr. Watson, further than to say that we believe no smaller space 
could have done justice to the author’s labours, since the remarks 
that follow the statistics of each species in the three earlier volumes 
of the ‘Cybele Britannica’ are so much to the point, and have 
contributed in no small degree to our present improved knowledge 
of the plants; still, we believe something might have been gained 
by giving in each case the names of the botanists whose testimony 
vouched for the occurrence of the plants in the several ‘ provinces” 
or districts. Might we venture to suggest to future ‘ Cybelists,” 
with the view of giving due prominence to the certainty or uncertainty 
of the records, some such plan as the following :— 
Suppose two lines to be given to the horizontal distribution of 
each species, the upper will contain the numerals which represent 
the “ provinces,” the second line will show the authorities, e. g.— 
Vinca|\ Prov. 1 2 3 4 Ss Fee 
minor { Auth. Ho. Br. Wts. Bb. Lg. 0 Dv. 0 0, 
By “future Cybelists,”’ we wish it to be understood we mean those 
