HORICULTURAL JOURNAL. 217 
regard to form, took place a little after into Belgium, to a very distin- 
guislied amateur of Brussels. All these plants had been collected in 
Mexico by M. Goleotti, a young and learned naturalist traveller, to whom 
all parts of natural history are indebted for a crowd of novelties. In the 
first rank figured AstropJiytum my7'iostigma, Anhalonium prismaticum^ 
EeMnocactus hexaedropJiorus, aulaeoganus, 2Ject{niferus, &c., Mammillaria 
spJiaerotricha, rJiapidacantha, oothele, &c. All these plants, purchased at 
a great expense by a newly converted but very distinguished amateur, 
endowed with the sacred fire, {odi jjrofanum vulgus,) w"ere with the greatest 
kindness placed at our disposition, and successively described by us with 
care in two works, which appeared under his auspices in 1838 and 1839. 
While on our part we were occupied with this work, M. Scheidweiler, 
Professor of Botany in the Institute of M. Vandermaelen, of Brussels, 
described some coming from the same invoice, and published them in the 
Bulletin of the Academy of Brussels, and in the Horticulteur Beige (1838.) 
In the second of our works, we attempted a trial of classification based on 
the general forms of the plants, and on their natural affinities. While 
profiting by the works of our predecessors, we were able, (thanks to the 
abundant riches which the two importations of which we have just spoken 
furnished,) to enlarge the field which was opened to us, and open new 
routes, and improve the old ones. 
We must not omit here to speak of a remarkable and as complete a 
work, as the time in which it was WTitten would permit, which is due to 
Dr. Pfeiffer. A year before the appearance of our first work on the Cacti, 
appeared the Enumeratio diagnostica Cactearum hucusque cognitarum of 
the botanist just named. In this work, the author inserted all the plants 
known up to his time, with the description which authora had given them, 
and added to them those of which he had particular knowledge. Unfor- 
tunately, whether because he wanted a point of comparison, or because he 
had no large collections to consult, or could not procure the necessary 
works, he inserted the descriptions of authors whose works had preceded 
his, without commenting upon them, or illuminating them by the light of 
comparative synonymy. 
We must not be too hasty in reproaching the author with this apparent 
negligence, of which we have rendered ourselves culpable, and for the same 
reasons. It is because it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to have at 
the same time, in the same place, or even separate, a complete library and 
collection of Cactaceae. But, for our part, we know none such in any part 
of France at this time. 
