liv 



THE QUINARY SYSTEM. 



and experience proves him correct, "the false naturalist is 

 he who natters himself with the idea of having attained the 

 natural method"* — a chimera which, having no existence except 

 in metaphysical logic, can never be found. 64 When we see 

 nature," says Mr. Vigors, in a most just and manly tone, " thus 

 made to bend to the views of man, it becomes every one to enter 

 his protest, however feeble, against doctrines so pregnant with 

 danger to the views of the student, and so subversive of the 

 sound principles that regulate the science :"f a remark which 

 my readers must perceive applies most markedly to the Quinary 

 system. I have been informed that some of Mr. MacLeay's 

 disciples say the system is quite artificial, while others say it is 

 only a symbolical representation of what may prove to be the 

 natural system. It is with this view, probably, that we are 

 taught the erroneous doctrine, that " the investigation of nature 

 has ceased to be a mere work of observation : the mind becomes 

 as much employed as the eye.";}; Such an admission will at 

 once save me the trouble of farther objecting; for it would be 

 idle to attempt refuting what is admitted to be invention or 

 fancy. 



Such are some of the many objections, which induce me 

 to oppose the doctrine, and reject the language of types, affinities, 

 analogies, development, transition, and quinary circles. Truth, 

 and the benefit of the reader, being my sole object, I have 

 endeavoured to avoid even the shadow of misrepresentation 

 by quoting largely the very words of the systematists ; and 

 in all cases, referring to the page from which the quotations 

 are made, that those who are interested, may examine the 

 context of the originals, for which I could not spare room. 

 This, I hope, will repel any charge of garbling, which is so 

 easily and plausibly made in such cases. In order to insure 

 accuracy also, I have sent proofs of these sheets to a number 

 of distinguished scientific and literary men, several of whom 

 are advocates of the system, and I have carefully attended to 

 their corrections and suggestions. Farther, should any error 

 in fact, or in argument, be subsequently proved against me, I 



* Horse Entoraologicse, pref. p. 18. f Zool. Journ. i. J 83. 



% Linn. Trans, xiv. 398. 



