150 ON SYSTEMATIC ZOOLOGY. 



not called upon for critical investigation of organs, or 

 nice distinctions of habits or economy; he was addressing 

 himself to those who had merely a bird before them, 

 and who desired to know in what manner its name could 

 be ascertained. He framed his system for the practical, 

 not the philosophic naturalist. The Systema Naturae 

 was to be an " Every -day Book," not a sealed volume; 

 and he built the foundation of his system accordingly. 

 It seems, therefore, to us, that the very deficiency which 

 has been so strongly urged against our author, is, in 

 fact, the chief merit for which he should have been 

 extolled. No one knew better that his system was arti- 

 ficial ; for it was, in fact, intended to be so. Had he 

 dwelt upon all those minute circumstances which are now 

 known to determine the natural station of a bird; had 

 he, in a genus which then consisted of five species, but 

 which now comprises thirty-five, minutely described 

 the modifications of their structure, or of their generic 

 peculiarities; his system might certainly have been more 

 philosophical, and possibly more natural, but it would 

 have become perfectly useless to all but a very few deep 

 thinkers. Nor would this have been the only objection: 

 general readers would ,have turned with disgust from 

 such tedious details ; and have justly reproached our 

 author with mystifying information, capable of being 

 conveyed in an intelligible form. The truth is, that 

 those who detract from the merits of the Systema Na- 

 turee forget the object for which it was written, and the 

 state of science when it appeared. Who that compares 

 the Synopsis Methodica Avium with the system of 

 Linnaeus, but must be struck with the vast superiority 

 of the latter .'' Let us not, however, institute invidious 

 comparisons, but rather allow that both these works 

 eminently advanced the progress of science. That the 

 genera of Linnaeus, with but few exceptions, are natural 

 assemblages, may be seen by the great number which 

 have been kept entire by the most eminent ornitholo- 

 gists who succeeded him. These groups, indeed, were 

 termed by our author genera, — a term which he applied 



