Retrospective Criticism. 187 
daily to work with her husband in the fields and highways, and to behold 
her children labouring by her side, until, stunted in growth and cramped in 
mind, they are sent forth into the world to seek other employment for the 
support of a life which, having always been a burden to them, they will 
the less hesitate to forfeit to the laws, by the infringement of those rights 
of which they never have known the value. 
It was not until some time after the review was written and printed, that 
I knew, or ever had heard, the name of the author of the Journal. I then 
learned that he was the friend of a respected and highly esteemed friend of 
my own; yet my opinion remains unchanged. Though amiable and kind- 
hearted, I yet think that he falls short of perfection, “and that some pas- 
sages in his work are calculated to increase an evil already of sufficient 
extent; and thus to become an instrument of mischief which he never 
contemplated. Let me request of the reader, when he lays aside the 
second review of the volume, to take up the first, and to judge for himself 
whether or not there be any thing in it like a malicious intention, or a design 
to wound the feelings of the author. 
I must, however, plead guilty to having said that the volume was grass- 
ereen, of sufficing plumpness, &c., and to not having said “ of what exact 
dimensions” I “ would have the book.’ But let me plead in extenuation, 
that I was totally ignorant of any censure conveyed in these very severe 
expressions, the rather as I designed none; but particularly liked the 
appearance of the volume in every respect, and (as J said) thought “ both 
the name and aspect inviting.” Still, as it is considered by many persons 
that every member of the fraternity of critics should wear his crown of 
plurality, and walk in stilts whenever he appears in public, it was doubtless 
a misdemeanor to condescend to be pleased, and to express my pleasure in 
a natural and uncritical manner: I should rather have said, “ We approve 
of the sober yet verdant hue of this unpretending little volume, since, 
however unimportant in owr eyes,” &c. 
The reader may conceive the regret which I must feel in acknowledging 
to my kind adviser that there is no hope of my improvement from the 
source he proposes, as Dr. Coplestone’s pamphlet, entitled Hints to a Young 
Reviewer, was familiar to me years before I became one. Entertainment, 
indeed, I might yet derive from the perusal, though it should be the tenth. 
I believe it is now out of print; and if A. F. will confer so great a benefit 
upon reviewers and authors, writers and readers, as to persuade some one 
to republish it (and this, as a Friend to Fair Criticism, he is surely bound 
to do), I will promise him to lose no time in reviewing it, and will endeavour 
to please him better. — A. January 14. 1830. 
A Term misapplied. — Since you so good-naturedly submit to be criticised by your correspond- 
ents, let me ask how you will justify the terms of one of the titles which appears in the last 
Number of Vol. I1., ** Inferior dexterity of the left hand.” Dexterity is derived from dexter, the 
right hand: how, then, can the left hand have the term applied to it? Surely ‘* activity,” or 
some such term, would have been more suitable, though not so amusing. — John Thompson. 
Hull, Jan, 11. 1830. 
The Jussieuean, or Natural, System of Plants. — Being acquainted with the Linnean system, but 
almost entirely ignorant of that of Jussieu, I anticipated much information from the papers on 
that subject to be given in the Numbers of your Magazine. The first was excellent; but the 
second, as far as furnishing that precise knowledge which the student requires, decidedly a failure, 
for want of definitions and engravings. —J. H. Davies. Portsmouth, Aug. 1. 1828. 
We found that the definitions would occupy too much space, and being scattered through differ- 
ent volumes, would lose much of their utility; we therefore considered it best to drop the con- 
tinuation of this article. Our readers may find the whole of it at the end of the Encyclopedia of 
Plants, and also in the Hértus Britéinnicus ; and those who wish to study the system fundamen- 
tally, may consult Clinton’s translation of Kichard’s New Elements of Botany (Svo, 14s.), or wait 
till Mr. Lindley’s work appears. — Cond. 
Translation, &c., of technical Terms. —1 cannot but agree with A. (Vol. I. p. 200.), that the 
introduction of the derivations, &c., into the text rather distracts the reader, and might ‘* with 
advantage occupy, as a glossary, the last page of the Numbers;’’ or perhaps, what would be 
better, might be inserted as notes at the bottom of the page in Which they occur: but, at all 
events, they should not be omitted, as they are a very excellent feature of the work ; indeed, I trust 
you will continue to follow up that plan, by giving the plainest explanation of every technical term ; 
and, if any inconvenience should arise by an alteration of the present mode, I would rather 
they should remain as they are given, than that one should be omitted. —J. H. Davies, 
