42 Review of Phillips’s Mineralogy. 
remains: and even his figures of crystals and measurements, in 
which department he was especially eminent, have disappeared. 
The work has certainly lost in value by this rejection of all that 
Phillips could call his own, while at the same time it has gained 
a new importance from the able crystallographic labors of its 
present authors. There was also some ground for supposing that 
the work would be especially adapted for this continent as well 
as the other, in the fact that an edition of Phillips had been 
issued here by Alger. But Mr. Alger’s name and book are 
hardly noticed through the volume. 
The work has many peculiarities and certain defects, the men- 
tion of which is of some interest to American mineralogists 
to the science. We propose therefore to run through its pages, 
briefly touching os oe, such a as will exhibit its character i in 
a just light. 
The first 50 pages are devoted to Crystallography. The sys- 
tem adopted is that of Prof. Miller. The subject is presented in 
an abstract mathematical form, with few explanations of the gen- 
eral principles and laws for the occurrence of secondary planes, 
and without any illustration of the distortions to which erystals 
are subject. ‘The names adopted for the six systems: of. aye 
tallization, are the cubic, pyramidal, rhombohedra 
oblique, and anorthic. Figures are given in the descriptive part 
of the work, illustrating the crystallization of the 
figures, however, with rare exceptions, are simply bbe or views 
in the direction of one of the axes, usually the vertical. They are 
drawn with precision and are excellent as far as they go. Bt 
they are not portraitures of crystals, and give no sufficient idea of 
the prevailing forms. Augite, zircon, anatase, for example, have 
each a crystallographic physiognomy easily recognized. 
from these plans, the student has no way of arriving at a knowl- 
edge of this physiognomy or of ascertaining the actual character 
of a crystal, since the length cannot by any powers of concep- 
tion or study be deduced. An octahedron thus represented 18 
not distinguishable from an elongated prism with pyramidal ter- 
minations, nor a scalenohedron or a rhombohedron from a tet 
minated sis poise prism. ‘The figures under cale spar are exatn- 
e plans, which are seldom more than two to a spe- 
cies, thei ‘s a large circle marked with dots, which exhibits i2 
an ingenious manner the positions of the faces of all known crys 
tals of the species. These circles, however, hardly convey any 
information not implied in the mathematical a aie of os 
planes, which to some extent are also given. T 
system of letters, not for the figures, os for Aeaigiagine and de- 
scribing secondary forms. For example, under Realgar (p. 177) 
the occurring combinations of: secondary: planes are page oO 
