542 



Miscellaneous. 



the opinion of only the two first Classes (chemists and agriculturists) 

 has been published. The chemists have found fault with the author 

 for having produced very little which is new, and for having pub- 

 lished what was already known before, as if it had been found out 

 by himself, without mentioning the name of the discoverer. The 

 agriculturists have probably taken well-founded objections to many 

 of the principles laid down by him, especially to his theory of manur- 

 ing. It is now time that the physiologists should raise their 

 voice, I mean the vegetable physiologists, as the other classes of 

 physiologists find very little information in his book, if we except a 

 few pages (pp. 299-346) where the author speaks of poison, miasma, 

 and contagion. The vegetable physiologists have now to determine 

 the value of Dr. Liebig's work as far as it relates to the science they 

 profess. Such a step on their side is completely justified by the 

 treatment they have experienced from this author, who, as often as 

 an opportunity occurs (and sometimes he fetches it from afar), 

 speaks of the physiologist with such wanton contempt, that in some 

 respects the whole book is nothing better than a libel on this class 

 of naturalists. Since Dr. Liebig asserts (p. 32) that even the most 

 distinguished of our physiologists do not connect any meaning with 

 such terms as — acids, bases, alkalis, etc., I think we shall be justified 

 in trying to prove that we, physiologists, understand much more of 

 chemistry than Dr. Liebig of physiology and the objects of our 

 science. It will then be obvious which of the two has most to learn 

 from the other. 



But it may be asked, why I take so much trouble with an 

 adversary, whose book contains so little which is exclusively his 

 own, and that little of small importance, whilst there are found in it 

 such numerous errors, and many things bordering on complete 

 absurdity. I therefore find myself obliged to lay before the public 

 what entitles the author to his attention on my part, and how it 

 happens that it is not a disgrace for me to enter the lists against him. 

 Dr. Liebig is no philosopher. Even in the literature of philosophy 

 he is so extremely ignorant, that, without comment, he thinks 

 proper to call the fancies of Schelling, the " Natural Philosophy 

 of the Germans." Still, it must be confessed, that his work adheres 

 closely to one great fundamental principle of philosophy ; and this he 



