S5S Retrospective Criticism., 



acceptable, for the sordid purpose of puffing, with the more sordid view of 

 promoting individual interest • this latter I call little short of a fraud upon 

 your subscribers. Of what other character, I would ask, is the no less 

 than four pages in No. XXIV., under the head of " London Nurseries," 

 devoted to plants that have flowered in the Epsom nursery ? However 

 scientifically the descriptions are given, I do not hesitate to pronounce it as 

 arrant a puff as ever was sent forth by the poet laureate of " No. 30. 

 Strand," on behalf of Warren's jet, or Hunt's matchless. Had it been a 

 report of your oivn visit to the nursery in question, it would have been quite 

 another matter ; but articles got up as the one alluded to have no more 

 business to be incorporated in the body of the Magazine than " Day and 

 Martin " or " Anderson's Pills." If Messrs. Young choose to employ a 

 puffer, let him take his appropriate place in your advertising sheet, as many 

 of his betters do, and let the publishers be paid for the insertion. And 

 these same Messrs. Young, too, have apprised " Alpha " (is he the puff- 

 maker ?) that they desire to open a correspondence with all the world n ! 

 " Bless me, how we pippins swim ! ! " and " by exchange or otherwise." 

 What an immense benefit to the whole world ! ! and what a privation has 

 that same world suffered by such correspondence having been delayed, so pre- 

 posterously delayed, till 1830 ! Just be so good as ask this same Mr. Alpha 

 whether Messrs. Young also informed him how far patriotism and a pure 

 love of science predominate in then* minds over the love of pounds, shil- 

 lings, and pence. The discrepancj' must be immense. And, again, what is 

 the rate of exchange between Epsom nursery and — where ? The Jardin 

 des Plantes at the Swan River ; or the botanical establishments in the domi- 

 nions of Don Francisco in Patagonia ? or the territories of the Cham of 

 Tartary or the Great Mogul. Information on these subjects would be very 

 desirable; and, by way of help, let Alpha ascertain and publish, for the 

 information of the " whole world," what the rate of exchange is now 

 between Epsom nursery and a certain establishment belonging to an ama- 

 teur (a particular friend of mine) not quite a hunched miles from Corstor- 

 phine, North Britain. To conclude, Mr. Conductor, let us have no more 

 puffs unless confined to the advertising sheet, or you will lose the good 

 opinion of many good friends as well as that of your very obedient servant, 

 ~— Aristides. London, February 1. 183Q. 



We have inserted this letter, word for word, as received, in the hopes that 

 the writer, whoever he may be, may feel ashamed at having put it together. 

 The notices of the rare plants which have flowered in the Epsom nursery 

 are no more puffs than the notices of the rare plants that are figured in the 

 botanical periodicals ; both we believe to be highly acceptable to our bota- 

 nical readers j if they are not, let them speak out. If nurserymen disap- 

 prove of such lists as those of Alpha, let them also speak out, we shall then 

 know what to do ,• but it is not such a letter as that of Aristides that will 

 move us either one way or the other. ■ — Cond. 



Mr. Capper's Papers on the Vine. — Sir, I am much obliged to you for 

 the copies of Mr. Capper's papers on the vine, which you have been so 

 obliging as to send me. I congratulate the readers of your Magazine most 

 sincerely upon the publication of these papers, which appear to be the 

 result of much patient and ingenious research. The tests spoken of by Mr. 

 Capper in his first communication are particularly useful. I hope he will, 

 however, forgive me for suggesting to him the propriety of reconsidering 

 the drawing and description of the vessel he has given at fig. 27. Yours 

 truly, — rjo/in Lindley. Acton Green, April 16. 1830. 



Dove's Dung in Samaria ; in reply to A. G. p. 2 1 6. — You, the late Sir 

 J. E. Smith, and A. G., are quite wrong. Miss Kent has shown (Mag, 

 Nat. Hist, vol. iii. p. 55.) that by Dove's Dung is meant the Ornitho- 

 galum-umbellatum, the roots of which resemble that excrement.- — «/. P. S. 

 April 3. • ■ 



