1857.] REVIEWS. 135 



the subject of British Botany. The ingenious author of this new 

 Flora will not be treated like a poacher on the fair domain of 

 science, but hailed as a fellow- labourer in a field large enough 

 for all who are genuine well-wishers to the spread of science and 

 to the progress of humanity. 



It is but just to Mr. Childs to allow him to open the subject, 

 and to explain his object in his own words. — " It is obvious that, 

 in preparing this book, a chief object has been the reduction of 

 its bulk, by selecting, as nearly as possible, the essential marks, 

 and those alone, by which each Order, genus, and species may be 

 distinguished." 



Lest the botanical public (a small one, but not likely to be 

 rendered smaller by such books as this under notice) should 

 think that the " gentleman doth profess too much," to what has 

 been above quoted he very modestly subjoins: '^To accomplish 

 this task fully and successfully would demand a far larger expe- 

 rience than I can lay claim to, combined with a happy and rare 

 faculty of observation, which would disregard characters, however 

 striking, that are not permanent, and in the midst of all fix only 

 upon those that are essential and determinate. I beg the reader 

 to believe that, in offering this little book, I do not for one mo- 

 ment indulge the presumption that I have succeeded in accom- 

 plishing this. I ofier it as a humble and necessarily very imper- 

 fect attempt to supply an undoubted deficiency." The effort is 

 made in the right direction, and it is very unassumingly an- 

 nounced in the above extract from the author's Preface. "I 

 have," he proceeds to inform his readers, " ventured however to 

 hope that it might possibly be of further use. There has of late 

 years been an increasing tendency in the direction of minute and 

 needless subdivision, and it may not be amiss that even thus at- 

 tention should be drawn in an opposite direction, to codification 

 and condensation." 



Botanists who delight in the multiplication of genera and spe- 

 cies, may differ from our author. Conservatives, as they may be 

 called, will approve whatsoever has a tendency to check the pro- 

 gresistas of science, those who promote the progressive develop- 

 ment of botanical synonyms, a department which forms now no 

 inconsiderable addition to the literature of Botany. Quot ho- 

 mines, tot sententice : " Many men, many minds." 



The office of the reviewer is best promoted or fulfilled by first 



