[ 2 74 ] 



the-plant alfo by Gerard's Englifh iynonym, I may poffibly by 

 inquiries either confirm or refute the popular notions with regard 

 to the virtues' and ufes of the plant, which is certainly the moft 

 material part of botany. 



' 1 And here I will take the liberty to fay that plants may be dif- 

 tinguifhed by fome circumftances which none of the writers on 

 that part of natural hiftory have attended to. 



If the tafte or fmell indeed is very remarkable, it is often no- 

 ticed ; but the leaves, flowers, feeds, and roots, often differ in 

 thefe particulars. 



The form of the root is again totally negle&ed if it is not bul- 

 bous, whereas the fuperficies above ground does not vary more 

 than what is under ground. The colour alfo of the leaves, when 

 they fade in the autumn, is a material circumftance in the natural 

 hiftory of the plant. 



Their medicinal ufe indeed is generally mentioned ; but the 

 culinary too much neglected, as in the inftance of water-crefles, 

 which, when boiled, are an excellent fuccedaneum for fpinnage, 

 and are of a more beautiful green when ferved on table than any 

 of the products of the kitchen-garden. 



Some botanifts have, in a few inftances, taken notice of the 

 infecl which feeds upon particular plants ; this however mould be 

 general, as well as mention made of the bird, or other animal, 

 which chiefly fubfifts upon them. 



Having thus prefumed to recommend fome particulars to the 

 attention of the writers on botany, I fhall conclude by repeating, 

 that I do not deny the great merit of Linnasus's Syftema Naturae, 

 as a general repertory, though it feems to me that the naturalift 

 who defcribes the production of the country which he inhabits 

 mould always be preferred, as affording more complete and more 



interefting^ 



