1858.] REVIEWS. 595 



examining the mud of the Corfu shower, that it mostly consisted 

 of quartzose sand, 



II. A dust-shower^ or simoom, which occurred near Bagdat, 

 is the subject of a second paper. An account of this was pub- 

 lished in the 'Literary Gazette.^ Professor Quekett examined 

 the specimen of dust, and found it also to consist of inorganic 

 particles, such as quartz, sand, etc. 



III. On the application of botany to ornamental art. 



In this paper the study of plants, as illustrative of the laws of 

 form and the relations of colour, is strongly recommended to 

 artists. " By repeated copying," says Pugin, " the spirit of the 

 original work is liable to be lost, so in decoration, the constant 

 reproduction of old patterns, without reference to the natural 

 type from which they were composed, leads to debased forms and 

 spiritless outline, and in the end to a mere caricature of a beau- 

 tiful original. It is impossible to improve on the works of God, 

 and the natural outlines of leaves and flowers must be more per- 

 fect and beautiful than any invention of man." ... 



This paper was illustrated, and the illustrations " led to a dis- 

 cussion of the origin of the Trefoil as an architectural ornament, 

 which was stated to belong to a very early period, although its 

 extensive use during the Christian era was probably connected 

 with the myth of St. Patrick and the Irish Shamrock. The dif- 

 ferences of opinion that prevailed respecting the species of plants 

 that formed the national emblems, were alluded to in detail. 

 Such matters, the author observed, are of little importance in a 

 botanical point of view ; but it must be confessed, that when an 

 artist asks such questions as — What plant is the Scottish Thistle ? 

 or- What is the Irish Shamrock ? and we cannot tell, it places 

 botany in a humiliating light; and we are not to charge him 

 with wanton neglect if he does not refer to nature in embodying 

 these our national emblems." 



There appear to be two ways of obviating this difficulty and 

 removing this reproach. Botanists should attempt at least to 

 come to some understanding on this point. The pages of the 

 ' Phytologist ^ will be open to all discussion on these objects, if 

 kept within due bounds. We do not indulge very sanguine 

 hopes of unanimity even here, but we would give every one who 

 has anything to say on the subject, an opportunity of giving 

 publicity to his views. 



