October  16,  1902. 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
353 
A  Biography  of  Dr.  Lindley. 
John  Lindley  was  bom  February  5,  1799,  at  Catton,  near 
Norwich,  which  may  now  be  styled  the  City  of  Botanists,  for  there 
were  born  three  of  England’s  greatest  botanists — Sir  James 
Edward  Smith,  Sir  William  Jackson  Hooker,  and  Dr.  John 
Lindley.  His  father  was  a  nurseryman,  but  being  unsuccessful 
in  business,  he  subsequently  undertook  the  direction  of  the 
Bristol  Nurseries  of  Miller  and  Sweet,  at  that  time  one  of  the 
most  extensive  and  prosperous  establishments  in  the  kingdom. 
He  was  the  author  of  a  very  useful  work,  which  was  edited  by 
his  son,  entitled  “  A  Guide  to  the  Orchard  and  Kitchen  Garden,” 
but  it  appeared  at  a  time  when  the  present  taste  for  garden 
literature  was  as  yet  undeveloped,  and  when  what  is  now  called 
gardening  was  confined  more  to  the  establishments  of  the  higher 
classes,  who  were  themselves  not  gardeners,  and  consequently 
that  excellent  work 
never  met  with 
the  encouragement 
it  merited,  and 
never  reached  a 
second  edition. 
Trained  as  young 
Lindley  necessarily 
was  among  plants 
a  n  d  flowers,  and 
being  surrounded 
by  so  many  botani¬ 
cal  associations  and 
associates,  it  is  not 
to  be  wondered  at 
that  an  intellect 
like  his  should  soar 
above  and  beyond 
the  ordinary  ideas 
of  a  nurseryman, 
and  see  something 
in  the  objects  with 
which  he  was  sur¬ 
rounded  of  greater 
interest  than  that 
which  was  con¬ 
nected  with  their 
commercial  value. 
We  find,  therefore, 
that  instead  of 
being  a  nursery¬ 
man  he  was  bent  on 
becoming  a  botan¬ 
ist,  for  so  early  as 
1819  he  published  a 
translation  of 
Richard’s  “Analyse 
des  Fruits and  in 
his  twenty  -  first 
year  he  produced 
his  “  Rosarum 
Monographia,”  the 
preparation  of 
which  must  have 
occupied  him  a 
long  time  pre¬ 
viously,  for  the  ex¬ 
cellent  plates  are 
all  from  his  own 
drawings,  and  the 
study  of  the  subject  must  necessarily  have  engaged  his  attention 
at  a  period  when  he  was  yet  a  mere  youth. 
In  the  following  year  Mr.  Lindley  published  “  Digitalium 
Monographia,”  and  about  this  time  he  became  garden  clerk  at 
the  Chiswick  Garden  of  the  (Royal)  Horticultural  Society,  which 
had  then  been  newly  formed  ;  and  in  this  capacity  he  remained 
till  the  retirement  of  Mr.  Sabine  in  1830,  when  Mr.  Bentham  was 
chosen  secretary  and  Mr.  Lindley  was  appointed  the  assistant 
secretary.  In  this  capacity  he  remained  till  his  retirement  in 
1858;  and,  as  a  recognition  of  his  long  services  to  the  Society  he 
was  chosen  secretary — an  honorary  appointment  he  retained  till 
1863.  About  the  time  he  became  connected  with  the  Horticul¬ 
tural  Society,  he  was  engaged  by  Mr.  Loudon  in  the  com¬ 
pilation  of  the  “  Encyclopaedia  of  Plants,”  which  occupied  him 
for  a  period  of  seven  years,  and  which  was  completed  in  1829. 
During  the  time  he  acted  as  assistant  secretary  to  the  (Royal) 
Horticultural  Society  he  held  several  other  appointments.  In 
1826  he  succeeded  Mr.  Bellenden  Ker  as  editor  of  the  “  Botanioal 
Register,”  established  by  Sydenham  Edwards  in  1815;  and  the 
botanical  attainments  he  exhibited  in  the  management  of  this 
and  the  execution  of  his  other  works  recommended  him  to  the 
botanical  chair  of  University  College.  London,  where,  in  the  end 
of  April,  1829,  he  delivered  his  introductory  lecture  as  Professor 
of  Botany  in  that  institution.  This  appointment  he  held  for 
twenty-nine  years ;  and  it  has  been  remarked  by  one  of  his  old 
pupils,  “  I  can  truly  say,  as  a  lecturer  he  was  one  of  the  best 
teachers  I  ever  heard.  Free  and  conversational  in  his  manner,  his 
matter  was  excellent  and  methodically  arranged.  I  entered  his 
class  with  little  knowledge  of,  and  less  liking  for,  botany,  and 
left  it,  having  taken  his  gold  medal  at  University  College,  having 
amongst  my  competitors  Dr.  W.  B.  Carpenter,  Dr.  Lankester, 
Dr.  Jenner,  &c.,  and  I  maintained  the  superiority  of  his  teaching 
by  taking  the  silver  botanical  medal  of  the  Apothecaries’  Com¬ 
pany  open  to  the  competition  of  all  the  students  in  England.” 
In  his  introductory  lecture  he  announced  his  intention  of 
teaching  the  natural  system  of  botany,  at  that  time  unpopular 
among  those  who  had  been  educated  in  the  Linnsean  school :  to 
this  lie  rigidly  adhered.  We  question,  however,  whether  so 
much  of  the  credit  usually  attributed"  to  Dr.  Lindley  as  the 
fosterer  of  the  natural  system  in  this  country  is  not  unduly 
rendered.  He  encouraged  the  study  of  it  in  preference  to  that 
of  the  Linnsean, 
and  in  all  his  works 
on  the  subject  lie 
adhered  to  that 
system.  Still  it 
cannot  be  forgotten 
that,  not  content 
with  the  natural 
systems  which  Jus¬ 
sieu  and  De  Can¬ 
dolle  originated,  he 
was  always  pro- 
pounding  some 
theory  of  his  own, 
which  was  never 
fixed,  but  which  at 
uncertain  intervals 
was  doomed  to  be 
supplanted  by 
another  idea  that 
seemed  to  find 
greater  favour  in 
the  mind  of  the 
author.  Students 
who  were  willing  to 
adopt  the  natural 
system  were  thus, 
by  Dr.  Lindley’s 
teaching,  kept  in  a 
state  of  constant 
uncertainty.  In  his 
“  Synopsis  of  the 
British  Flora,” 
published  in  1829, 
he  there  adopts  the 
arrangement  of  De 
Candolle,  a  system 
which  has  received 
universal  accept¬ 
ance  from  every 
botanist  in  this 
country  and 
America ;  but  in 
1830  appeared  his 
first  elementary 
work  on  the 
natural  system,  en¬ 
titled  “  An  Intro- 
duction  to  the 
Natural  System  of 
Botany.”  Instead  of  following  the  systems  of  Jussieu  and  De 
Candolle,  he  adopted  that  of  the  latter,  ignoring  the  apetalous 
classes  of  both,  and  throwing  them  in  with  the  polypetalous  class. 
This,  as  a  consequence  destroyed  any  ideas  of  sequence,  or  even 
of  arrangement,  that  may  have  been  formed  by  the  student  who 
had  just  mastered  either  of  the  other  systems,  and  confused  those 
of  others  who  were  but  on  the  threshold  of  the  science. 
In  1833  Dr.  Lindley  published  his  “Nixus  Plantarum,”  in  which 
he  restored  the  apetalous  group,  which  three  years  previously  he 
abolished,  and  ignored  altogether  the  liypogynous  and  perigynous 
structures,  which  form  such  distinct  characters  in  the  other 
systems;  retaining  only  the  epigynous,  which  he  made  to  repre¬ 
sent  a  subordinate  section,  and  adopting  the  character  of  the 
albumen  for  the  primary  divisions.  In  this  case  the  affinities 
and  sequence  of  the  orders  were  again  entirely  disturbed.  Three 
years  later  appeared  the  second  edition  of  “  A  Natural  System  of 
Botany,”  in- which  the  arrangement  set  forth  in  the  “Nixus” 
was  generally  adhered  to,  but  differed  in  some  of  the  details,  and 
this  form  he  introduced  in  the  subject  “  Botany,”  published  by 
the  Society  for  the  Diffusion  of  Useful  Knowledge  in  1838,  and 
which  was  intended  as  a  book  of  instruction  for  the  masses;  but 
there  is  not  even  a  reference  in  it  to  the  system  of  De  Candolle, 
which  at  the  time  was  being  taught  by  Hooker  in  Glasgow, 
