liv 
THE QUINARY SYSTEM. 
and experience proves him correct, the false naturalist is 
he who flatters himself with the idea of having attained the 
natural method”* — a chimera which, having no existence except 
in metaphysical logic, can never be found. ‘‘ 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,”J 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 inventwn or 
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 Eiiiomologica?, prof. p. 18. f Zool. Joiim. i. 183. 
t Linn. Trans, xiv. 398. 
