130 
BOTANICAL CLASSIFICATION. 
several recent changes in its arrangement have given a colouring of justice and 
meetness to this title. Botanists of the Linnaean school vehemently affirm that it 
is an inapplicable epithet ; while its advocates, admitting that the system has yet 
numerous anomalies and defects, explain its appellation relatively to the arrange- 
ment of Linnaeus. 
In laying the foundation of some future remarks on the Natural Orders, it 
may be well to state the advantages of either system. By the Linnsean method, 
vegetation, as all our readers are probably aware, is divided into twenty-four 
prominent Classes, these being subdivided into an irregular number of Orders. 
The Classes (excepting the twenty-fourth, which is comprised of flowerless plants) 
are founded on the number and position of the stamens, and the presence or absence 
of the other sexual organs : the Orders represent the number of pistils, up to the nine- 
teenth Class, the divisions of which are more purely natural ; and those of the 
remaining Classes, (excluding the twenty-fourth) are distinguished, some by the 
number of stamens, others by peculiarities in the disposition of stamens and pistils. 
This, then, is a fair outline of the system. It has no details, unless it be the 
enumeration of genera and species, which are arbitrarily and desultorily composed ; 
and its basis may be comprehended at a single glance. 
Far different is the case with regard to the Natural arrangement. It is complex 
in its nature, abounds with explanatory particulars, and requires considerable 
exertion to grasp and remember its numerous and comprehensive divisions. But 
when thoroughly known and understood, the student has the whole vegetable 
kingdom within his power, and may at once satisfactorily assign any plant its 
peculiar and distinguishing properties. Its characters are not illusory, because 
minute, permanent, and invariable ; the object of research may immediately be 
traced to its proper position : the reverse of which is amongst the most glaring 
defects of the system of Linnaeus. The opposition to the Natural method may 
therefore appropriately be stigmatized as an array of indolence against industry. 
We are far from desiring the abolition or disparagement of the arrangement of the 
immortal Linn33us. Let it still exist for those who wish to profess a rudimental 
knowledge of botany, without ever penetrating deeper than the examination of the 
few organs on which that classification is founded. It is an admirable stepping- 
stone ; but, if the student who attains this position do not feel desirous of advancing 
higher in the scale of information, the inference is natural that he has not even 
mastered the elements of the science ; for it is one of its distinctive characters to 
impart an eager desire for further acquisitions, which is never satisfied till its 
extreme boundaries are fully explored. 
It is much to be feared that the existing antipathy to the Natural method, 
arises chiefly from the prevailing ignorance of structural botany. Were young- 
gardeners and botanical students better informed on that subject, the mastery of 
this system would only be a question of memory. The titles of its various orders 
are nearly all modifications of the names of one of the principal genera of which 
