866 
CHAPTER OF CRITICISM. 
single plant of Rosa canina flowered in the hedges before June 19, and then 
very partially. 
The Doncaster Lyceum, &c. 
I find I must at present considerably abridge what further observations I had 
intended to make, I greatly admire the fearless spirit in which you speak out as 
to the Doncaster Lyceum. Squeamish persons may, as usually happens, wince 
and hesitate, but the plan you have pursued is the only way for improvement. 
Constant adulation is the ruin of many institutions, the heads of which keep 
bowing and bowing to each other, till, with their backs turned to real truth and 
science, the recoil of their courtliness hurries them down the precipice of ruin. 
You are, in my opinion, quite right in saying that these institutions should be 
patronized by the countenance of noblemen and country gentlemen ; but no class, 
professional or not, should evidently have the hand of fellowship held out to it 
more than others. If so disgust ensues, and justly I must say, that in Worcester 
all our literary and scientific societies are somewhat faulty-—Politics in one, 
jealousy and monopoly in another, and a true scientific spirit absent from all. 
Hence great cry and little wool. I am afraid human nature wants another 
century of rubbing down ; for while selfishness and charlatanism prevail in the 
world as they do at present, true observing but quiet science is sure to wither, 
and parade and ceremony are the sorry substitutes for investigation and research, 
I speak generally, though I admit it is perhaps unwise so to speak (except con¬ 
fidentially), for human nature recoils from the pill that is not gilded by flattery. 
I shall, however, always give my opinion freely. 
Believe me to be, my dear Sir, 
Yours very sincerely, 
'Dryadville, near Worcester, Edwin Lees. 
Aug, 7,1837. 
Concerning two Errors in a Review of Hewitson's ‘‘ British Oology.’' 
To the Editor of the Naturalist, 
Dear Sir, —In your May number (p. 112), I perceive a review of my twin 
No. (xxx. and xxxi.), which must have been written without the least regard to 
accuracy. In the first place, in criticising plate cxviii., in which the eggs of the 
Chiff Chaff and Wood Wren are figured, it is stated, in reference to the former 
(which is in the new nomenclature called the Darklegged Warbler), that it ought 
to be Sylvia loquax, and not S. hippolais, as given by Mr. Hewitson.” Now 
I should much like to know what authorities your reviewer has for setting me 
right on this point, and beg to give mine for its adoption, which are to me quite 
