MEMOIR OF REV. JOHN FLEMING, D.D. 671 
may be formed of this work, by a glance at the number of genera and species he 
there described, belonging to the British Islands :— 
Mammalia, : : ; 38 genera with 60 species. 
Birds, an oe : peek O2 - 230°" 5, 
Reptiles, . : , ‘ 7 44 AE ees 
Fishes, ; : : 89 Bs DAO aes 
Recent Mollusca : Sita! 55) 597 
+P) 
And extinct Mollusca no fewer than 1031 species. 
All these he not only fully described, but supplied the synonymes, and gave 
the authorities and reference to each individual of the species. The ‘* History of 
British Animals” is still a standard book, and formed the model for Forbes and 
HENLEY’s beautiful work, on the ‘ British Mollusca.” In 1829, FLEMING contri- 
buted to the Quarterly Review, an article on BicHENo’s “ Systems and Methods 
in Natural History.” Its appearance was most opportune, as naturalists were at 
war in regard to the systems of Linn.zus, Jussieu, Macueay, and the supporters 
of the Dichotomous method, of which FLEmine was the most puissant champion. 
In this admirable paper he claims for the study of natural history the respect of 
every educated gentleman, and hopes that the time is not far distant when a 
naturalist and a natural will cease to be synonymous. He had no doubt in his 
remembrance, when he penned this passage, the case of Lady GLANVILLE, whose 
will was attempted to be set aside on the ground of lunacy, because she had 
shown a great partiality for insects, and Ray, the author of “The Wisdom of God 
manifested in the Works of Creation,” had to appear and bear testimony on the 
day of trial to her Ladyship’s sanity. Macreay, who proposed the Quinary 
system, suffered severely in this most trenchant article. To these strictures 
MacteEay replied in a violent attack in the seventh volume of the ‘‘ Philosophical 
Magazine,” under the title “On the Dying Struggles of the Dichotomous System.” 
It would not be edifying to quote the gross personalities which characterize this 
paper; in the heat of his ire he asserts that BuckLanp had stript from FLEMIne 
his borrowed plumes, and claims credit for forbearance in not plucking the last 
feather. Mr Macteay’s absence from England, being then resident in Cuba, 
perhaps was the cause of his not being informed that the Oxford Professor was, 
instead of his opponent, the plucked. To this most ungenerous attack FLemine 
replied in a forcible letter to the same Journal, which, as it gives a fair example of 
his style, is worthy of quotation :— 
* “ Art thou thus bolden’d, man, by thy distress?—or else a rude despiser of 
good manners, that in civility thou seem’st so empty? Your Magazine for June 
having reached me at the ordinary period, I proceeded to an examination of its 
contents, with the usual degree of interest. The article from the pen of Mr 
Macieay, ‘On the Dying Struggles of the Dichotomous System,’ naturally 
attracted my notice, not merely as an attack against myself, but as the exhibition 
VOL. XXII. PART III. 8M 
