4 THE NATURALIST. 



were accepted ; but tliese considerations do not stop liim for a moment. 

 Believing that lie is in tlie right, he goes straight ahead without troubling 

 himself about the perturbations which must ensue. 



If we raise our voice against him, it is because we fear that the new 

 school is follomng a false track, a track in which we are afraid of seeing a 

 whole generation lost. Possibly there is no occasion for so much alarm — 

 perhaps we om^selves are in error, l^evertlieless, in spite of the assurances 

 of our antagonists, we shall hold fast to the old ideas, properly interpreted. 

 Our own observations of l^atme, and exj)eriinents in cultivation, still 

 lead us to believe that the true species are not those of the new school ; that 

 the species of nature is something siifjicientlii well marked out, provided tvith 

 characters which are in general easily appreciable, that it varies within certain 

 limits, that between these limits it produces varieties lohich accommodcde them- 

 selves to the medium in ivhich theg live, that some types are more pliable 

 ( flexible J than others, hut tliat cdl are confined within certain limits over 

 which they cannot jiass. These are the ideas that have guided us in all our 

 studies — we might almost call them our creed. A different idea, and another 

 creed rule the researches of M. Jordan. Being a man of good faith and con- 

 vinced of his principles, as we believe him, we must respect his method of 

 observation. Spite of an antagonism of no new date, Ave cannot refuse to admire 

 his talent, which is incontestable, 'No one ever has possessed, like him, the 

 indefatigable ardour, which he has shewn during five-and-twenty years, in 

 analysing this multitude of forms, neglected before his time, and in following 

 them day by day under cultivation. All those who know what extraordinary 

 labour is required in tliis class of studies, will most certainly render due 

 liomage to the Botanist of Lyons. Still it is to be regretted that the 

 prodigious labours wliich he is engaged in contemplating, do not rest on a 

 more solid basis. 



In reading the preface to his " Diagnoses," — a most remarkable pro- 

 duction — we are almost led to embrace his doctrines, so close is his 

 reasoning, so ably are Ms arguments drawn up. But the premises of this 

 eloquent demonstration, are, we will not say radically false, but extremely 

 doubtful. From the moment his basis is laid open to doubt, we cannot 

 admit his deductions as certainly established. An edifice with such a foun- 

 dation does not promise a long duration. We much fear that it will give 

 way, but its ruins will furnish us with excellent materials for building ano- 

 ther, materials which might otherwise have long been wanting. Indeed, 

 amongst a multitude of very bad species— at least bad in our eyes — ^we may 



