( 145 ) 
Art. XXVI . — Remarlis on the Flora Scotica of Dr Hooker. 
TL HE want of a full and accurate description of the vegetable 
productions found in Scotland, had long been lamented by the 
botanists of that country. Separated as it is from England, by 
physical differences not confined to its vegetables alone, Scot- 
land must be allowed an importance among the European coun- 
tries sufficient to sanction an attempt to elucidate its phytogra- 
phy, and to merit a peculiar Flora, separate from that of the sis- 
ter kingdom. Whether it has been owing to the deficiency of 
botanical knowledge among the natives, or of sufficient enter- 
prise or leisure among those qualified to undertake the work, 
it is not of great importance to determine ; but it ought to be 
more or less mortifying to that people, noted as they are for in- 
dustry and the cultivation of science, to reflect that the prize of 
merit in this department must be conferred on foreigners. Light- 
foot may be said to have been the only person previous to our 
own times, who had given any account of our plants worthy of 
notice. His Flora, admirable as it is, considering the time at 
which it was compiled, and the limited opportunity of observa- 
tion which he possessed, has been found defective in many es- 
sential points ; and besides fulfilling the principal intention of 
the work, namely, guiding the student to a knowledge of the 
vegetable productions of the country, has served to show the 
adept the necessity of a more perfect work, better suited to the 
improved state of the science, and more capable of gratifying 
the curiosity of those naturalists who look beyond the mere clas- 
sification of the works of Divine Wisdom and Beneficence. It 
was reserved for Dr Hooker, a native of England, and Profes- 
sor of Botany in the University of Glasgow, to present the public 
with another and more perfect Flora of Scotland. 
A few remarks on this work, which may in part anticipate, 
and partly lead to observations of a general nature, are now to 
be offered. The propriety of determining general rules, by 
wliich the plan and execution of a work on science are to be ex- 
amined, may be apparent enough ; but in the present case, the 
VOL, VJ. NO. 11. .JANUARY 1822. K 
