avoided at the time, when the application of Comparative Anatomy to questions of classification was very far from being as rigidly carried out, as it is now, by the most highly gifted naturalists. The result of the recognition of Anatomy as one of the best guides in the study of Zoology, has been to simplify arrangement.* In no department has this tendency to simplification, as the fruit of increasingly exact knowledge of structure, been more marked than in the branch now referred to. The task which Fleming proposed to himself in this paper, shews how wide the survey needed to be in order to give anything more than a dry outline.

"We shall divide," he remarks, "the sequel of this article into two chapters, the first of which shall contain a general view of the classification of the genera, and in the second will be given the classification and natural history of the species. The latter will be subdivided into four sections, corresponding to the four orders of intestina, mollusca, zoophyta, and infusoria. As we are able to devote but a small portion of our work to this subject, we shall confine any particular description to those species which are most important; and to relieve the tediousness of systematic arrangement, we shall mention everything worth notice under the genus or species then under consideration." Notwithstanding the range here indicated, he finds room for such observations as these:-" Dew-worms, though in appearance a small and despicable link in the chain of nature, yet, if lost, might make a lamentable chasm. For, to say nothing of half the birds and some quadrupeds which are almost entirely supported by them, worms seem to be the great promoters of vegetation (which would proceed but ill without them) by boring, perforating, and loosening the soil, and rendering it pervious to rains and the fibres of plants, by drawing straws and stalks of leaves and twigs into it; and most of all, by throwing up such infinite numbers of lumps called worm-casts, which form a fine manure for grain and grass. Worms probably provide new soil for hills and slopes when the rain washes the earth away; and they affect slopes, probably to avoid being flooded.

"Gardeners and farmers express their detestation of worms; the former, because they render their walks unsightly, and make them much work; and the latter, because they think worms eat their green corn. But these men would find that the earth, without worms, would soon become cold, hard-bound, and void of fermentation, and consequently sterile; and be

* A good illustration of this occurs in connection with the Entozoa. Owen reduces the divisions of the older naturalists to two-Calelmintha and Sterelmintha.

sides, in favour of worms, it should be hinted that green corn, plants, and flowers, are not so much injured by them as by many species of insects in their larva or grub-state, and by unnoticed myriads of those small shellless snails called slugs, which silently and imperceptibly make amazing havoc in the field and garden."

It in no way detracts from the ability shewn in this article, to say that it might now be greatly improved. In some points, it is at fault, as in the explanation of the motion of the earthworm, and in others, as in the habits of the same creature, it might be largely supplemented. While working in such channels, he was not unmindful either of the unremunerative Wernerian, or the remunerative Edin. Phil. Journal. To the Proceedings of the former, he communicated "Dewlike Drops on Leaves of Corn," "The Water Rail," "Sertularia," "New species of Vorticella,"* &c., and to the latter, "The Arctic and Skua Gulls," "Sertularia gelatinosa," "Changes of Colour in the Feathers of Birds," &c. In 1821, a favourable opportunity occurred of acquainting himself with the west coast of Scotland, and of obtaining some relaxation from the severe mental labour connected with the preparation of his first great work. He was invited by his intimate friend, Robert Stevenson, Esq., to cruise with him along the west coast, in the Government Lighthouse Yacht. They put in for a few days at Campbelton, and the worthy magistrates paid them the compliment of conferring on them the freedom of the "guid toun." They were elected with all honours, "Burgesses, Freemen, and Guild Brothers of Campbelton, with power to them to bruick, and enjoy the privileges, liberties, and immunities belonging to Burgesses, Freemen, and Guild Brothers of the samen."

"My voyage," he writes to Neill, "was very agreeable. Mr Stevenson was most attentive, and enabled me to do a good deal. I regret much that we had no dredge on board. I was so fortunate as to find in Kirkwall Bay the Asterias niger of Muller, new to Britain, and in Loch Broom a Terebratula (recent) very different from the T. cranium from Zetland. It is more like a pecten, and bears a very close resemblance to some of the fossil species. I satisfied myself, beyond a doubt, that the reputed species of the

* A paper in which hints were thrown out which have led to a correct estiImate of the Cilia on such creatures.

genus Pedicellaria of Muller, considered parasitical on the Echinus, are, in fact, organs of that animal. In mineralogy my observations were too desultory and hurried to be satisfactory."

"We are still somewhat at issue about the note on Extensions.* I do admit all your premises, but I deny your conclusions. Extensions do not die at (or near) a particular time, because the plant from which they were taken has reached the term of its natural death. There is no such law of vegetable life rendering the dissolution of both simultaneous, or nearly so, as the fact of the wall-flower demonstrates. But this is not the conclusion at which I aimed the blow. It was at the assertion of Smith, which you have in your paper (for which I return you many thanks) repeated, 'that propagation by SEEDS is the only true reproduction of PLANTS.' Now this is a barefaced assertion in opposition to innumerable facts, and it appears as a conclusion from premises which do not warrant such an inference. If I have still misunderstood Knight's views, it is because they are unintelligible, and many must be similarly mistaken, for the doctrines which I have attacked I have heard defended both in Scotland and Ireland, under the protection of Knight authority The note as now modified will, I trust, not appear so offensive as formerly. You attach too metaphysical a meaning to the terms sympathy and identity, and infer that I was speaking of the stock supporting grafts, when I had obviously in view the parent stock from which the grafts were taken. When I have more leisure, I may perhaps extend this note for the Horticultural Society. In some of its bearings the subject is curious, and might probably be rendered useful."

On his return, Dr Fleming had resumed his ministerial and scientific labours with renewed earnestness. He visited the households of his parish; and to science, he communicated three interesting papers, entitled, "Gleanings of Natural History during a voyage in 1821," and published in the Edin. Phil. Journal. He also sent a notice of a Submarine Forest in the Firth of Tay, to the Royal Society. In this paper, he discusses several interesting questions, bearing upon submarine forests in general. Readers will notice, that even at that time (1822), he had come to question the hypotheses regarding shore-elevation and depression, which then generally prevailed, and which still influence several eminent geologists. Next year, he published his "Philosophy of Zoology." This work contains the thoroughly matured thoughts of many years, on the important questions treated in it. An analysis of a work

By cuttings, and, as in the tulip, &c., by bulbs. See Phil. Zool., vol. i. p. 426.

so well known by naturalists, is not needed here.* The following letter from Baron Cuvier will indicate the high estimate in which that profound naturalist held "The Philosophy of Zoology":

"Monsieur,--Je connaissais déjà tout le mérite et tout l'intérêt de l'ouvrage que vous avez publié sur la Zoologie et que je m'étais empresse de me procurer; mais j'attache un nouveau prix à le tenir de votre main. Ce temoignage de votre estime m'est infiniment précieux et je vous en ai beaucoup de reconnaissance. J'aurais desire toutefois que vous éussiez un peu plus approfondi ma theorie des coexistences d'organisations et les applications nombreuses que j'en ai faites dans mon ouvrage sur les os fossiles, vous auriez probablement reconnu qu'elle s'éloigne moins que vous ne croyez de votre façon de penser, et surtout vous auriez evité de la présenter comme un appui du materialisme.

"Je ne vous en prie pas moins, Monsieur, de recevoir avec mes remercimens l'expression de mes sentimens les plus distingués.

BN. CUVIER."

"Paris, Nov. 30th. 1824. The work found its way into the hands of M. Zendrini, the accomplished Professor of Mineralogy and Zoology at Pavia, and was by him translated into Italian. It is still a favourite in Italy. "Dr Malcomson," says Hugh Miller, in a note to page 211 of "The Old Red Sandstone," "lately found an elegant Italian translation of Fleming's Philosophy of Zoology, high in repute among the elite of Rome."

Some time before giving this work to the public, Dr Fleming sent a copy of it to his friend Dr Barclay, than whom there was no better judge of the subjects treated of, and received the following communications :

"

Edinburgh, Oct. 8th. 1822. "My Dear Sir, I am now ready, after many interruptions, to communicate the opinion which I entertain of your first volume. The second I

* An analysis both of this work and of the "British Animals," was given by me in the North British Review for February 1858. The exposition of what is known as the "Dichotomous System of Classification," first proposed on the continent by Lamark, and in Britain by Dr Fleming, led to much controversy. The Quinarians, led on by M'Leay, were all in arms against it. Fleming dealt some heavy blows at the "Quinarians" in several journals, and especially in "The Quarterly," in an able article on "Systems and Methods of Natural History." Ifany reader wishes to see a full statement of this controversy, in which there are not a few topics interesting to the philosophic naturalist, I may refer him to Prof. Rennie's excellent edition of Col. Montagu's Ornithological Dictionary, a work which owes much of its usefulness to the previous improvements of Fleming.

have not yet read, but have begun it, and shall peruse it with the same care and attention as I have the first. Upon the whole, your first is excel· lent, and will be of much advantage in conveying to naturalists, not only interesting, but very comprehensive views. If any things objectionable are to be found in it, I think they will be a few of your anatomical descriptions; not because they are incorrect, but because they are not sufficiently minute for anatomists, and more than too minute for general readers, to whom, without plates, a considerable portion of them must be unintelligible. Several of them, likewise, are descriptions of a species or genus into which many particulars are introduced which belong not to the order or class in general, and which ought not to enter into the idea which we are to form correctly of the whole. Your observations on the faculties of the mind are not only excellent in my opinion, but in some particulars even super-excellent, especially on instinct and reason, on liberty and necessity, and on the degrees of the intellectual powers possessed by the lower animals. Your observations on these subjects, I think, are new; and, as you state them, so obviously just, that it is a matter of surprise how they have not occurred to some hundreds of zoologists before your time. But philosophers, like others, have a partiality for far awa' fowls and fair feathers, and, like young fishers, are apt to cast their line on the opposite side of the river, though most of the fish which they labour to catch be on the side next to themselves. Men, in general, are too fond of dwelling on their superiority over the lower animals. They have neither wings to fly, nor fins to swim, nay, in comparing themselves with insects and quadrupeds they feel a pride in having only two feet to walk upon. And as for the reason of which they boast, it leads a few of them, it must be confessed, to a knowledge of God and to the cultivation of arts and sciences, but not a small number to poverty, sin, and wretchedness, to prison, exile, and the gibbet. Were you to start for a vacant chair in logic, moral philosophy, or metaphysics, and were I to recommend you, I should simply refer to your observations on the faculties of the mind, which are not founded on merely the speculations of the closet, but on accurate and comprehensive views of the animal kingdom at large. Excuse these few remarks, and believe me, my dear Sir, with much esteem, yours very truly, JOHN BARCLAY." "Edinburgh, Oct. 16. 1822.

"My Dear Sir, I have now got as far in your second volume as page 437, and am much pleased with your excellent observations on the method of investigating the character of animals. There are many important remarks I see in your general descriptions, which are not to be found in the tableau elsewhere, as the Regne Animal of Cuvier. Blumenbach and Cuvier have certainly, in several respects, improved as well as altered the zoological arrangements of Linnæus, though I think that in general we oftener meet with alterations than improvements in such arrangements. I could wish that you, or one of such information as you, would publish a tabular view of the

с