THE QUINARY SYSTEM. 
ii 
lieretikes : ” — At the same time, I am well convinced this was 
done without a shadow of sinister design, as the deservedly 
esteemed authors do not believe the doctrine implie'd by their 
words. 
Thus it is that men of unquestionable genius and extensive 
knowledge, when they construct for themselves fantastic theories, 
‘‘without form and void,” are certain to “darken counsel by 
words without knowledge,” no less absurd, as Dr. Wm. Hunter 
said upon a similar occasion, than “ if colours had been explained 
by sounds.” f Such I conceive to be the doctrine of analogy^ 
highly useful when judiciously employed; but when pushed to 
the extremes above exemplified, most absurd and pernicious. 
The grouping of animals in fives, a prominent feature of the 
Qjiinary system, I can easily prove to be equally fanciful and 
baseless, as the doctrine of Types^ Affinities^ Analogies^ Progress^ 
Development^ and Quinary Circles. But it possesses no better 
claim to originality than the rest, for the idea was entertained by 
Linnaeus : “ It was his opinion,” says Pulteney, “ that nature acts 
‘ numero qiiinario,’ as he informs us in his Diary.” f That certain 
numbers are found to prevail among the works of creation is suffi- 
ciently obvious, but so far from one number or its multiples appear- 
ing to be universal, we find as great a variety as in any other cir- 
cumstance. In botany, for instance, one plant [Ranunculus) shall 
have five flower leaves, (petals^) and another, (AYcarm, Persoon,) 
having what would be termed the nearest ciffinity to it, shall have 
nine flower leaves, (petals,) not even a multiple of five. The 
other parts of the organs of fructification vary much more widely. 
Most birds again have four toes, though some have only three, as 
the bustard, (Otis, Linn^us,) and others only two, as the ostrich 
(Struthio Camelus.) The organs of sense are usually reckoned 
five, but are in fact ten, in the larger animals, being all in pairs, 
even to the tongue, which is divided by a median line, while spiders 
have from one§ to four pairs of eyes. It might answer the purpose 
of a systematist to tell us that a spider has twice five legs, including 
the pair of feet-jaws, as the French call them ; but what would he 
* Vaiiitie and Uiicertaintie of Artes and Sciences, cli. 25. 
t Intr. Lect. X Pulteney’s Linn, by Maton, p. 167. 
§ MacLeay, Dying Struggle, p. 33. 
