ANIMAL KINGDOM. 325 



mals has not been sooner discovered, let it be recollected 

 that it is founded on knowledge acquired by the study of 

 comparative physiology. There are two methods by which 

 we may arrive at a classification of organized beings, and 

 they may be said to correspond with the ancient and mo- 

 dern methods of natural philosophy. The first is, to make 

 an arbitrary division of Nature, and then, holding it as a 

 law, to view the works of God through this medium of our 

 own creation, by Avhich they cannot fail to be distorted. 

 The second method is, to commence with supposing no- 

 thing known but what has originated in actual experiment 

 by the comparative anatomist, and then, by comparing the 

 affinities thus collected, to attempt to gain that knowledge 

 of natural groups which in the first method we started 

 with supposing as already acquired. This last mode of 

 proceeding could only be adopted when comparative ana-* 

 tomy had made great progress as a science ;. and even now 

 that it is adopted, I shall not be surprised to find it con- 

 sidered as a premature attempt. I will even freely confess, 

 that not merely the abject I have principally in view, 

 namely, the place of Scarabcsus Sacer, but also my little 

 acquaintance with the subjects necessary to be discussed, 

 prevents me from entering more minutely into the invest^ 

 gation of the classes which compose the great divisions of 

 Vertebrata, Mollusca, Acrita, and Radiata. To others 

 therefore more skilled in their anatomy I leave these parts 

 of the animal kingdom, once for all stating, that the ana- 

 tomical observations on which I have founded the pre- 

 ceding arguments are all recorded in the works of the most 

 celebrated naturalists. 



How much in particular T owe to the labours of MM. 

 Cuvier and Lamarck, is sufficiently clear. It is a tribute in 



