excuse himself for injuring one of our ancestors, with the words. He is only a Briton. But as this plea is not very philosophical, and as it will serve for the Negro, or any other race, as well as against him, the refinement of the present age has called in more plausible arguments. The hypothesis of the existence of a chain, in the productions of nature, affords by analogy the supposition, that in some instance the human race also is connected with the brute creation. This whole theory, therefore, Dr. J. strenuously opposes; and indeed, in the strictest sense of the word, it cannot possibly exist. Were the different species of the creation connected by imperceptible intermediate shades, the very term species must, be exploded.

If we withdraw our attention from the nature of things, and from those subjects of which we can comprehend so little, and apply it to such as are more within the range of our capacities, we may, with the gradationist, trace a scale in every order and department of nature. Commence at any

point, and the chain rapidly advances; from the least ponderous body, from the purest ether to the heaviest metal, there are innumerable intermediate links; one substance is a little heavier, has a rather greater. specific gravity than another. The same chain holds good in the appearance of bodies, and in the dispositions and propensities of animals: a horse prefers being fed with oats, a cow is less partial to that grain, a sheep less so still, a hog turns it over with his snout, and if it takes a mouthful, it chews it with evident disgust, and is long before it pleases to swallow it. Other animals separate the husk from the flour, and eat only the latter and some animals do not use this vegetable in any state.' P. 41.

We may produce systems in which man shall stand next to the ape, the swine, the elephant, or the plucked fowl; but these are not the arrangements of nature. In order to study her works, we find it expedient to place them in a line; but it is not to be supposed that a Being, powerful enough to create, could be restricted by any such arrangement. The more we examine what are looked upon as connecting links, the more we find, that they belong decidedly to one or the other division. Whales and dolphins have been esteemed fishes, zoophytes plants, and the fungi animal productions; but they can as little be deemed intermediate in the chain of organized beings, as the Georgium Sidus a medium between fixed stars and planets, because he resembles the former in his appearance, and was at first esteemed one. Whatever chain fancy may picture in the productions of nature, man is as se cure, by the characteristic of reason, from the intrusion of the ape, as the fixed stars, by their unborrowed light, from the intrusion of a planet. But Dr. J. thinks the dignity of man se riously endangered, by admitting the mere idea of a gradation; and requires that it be proved to exist throughout all the other productions of nature, before any connexion, even

of his animal part, with the brute, be argued from analogy, He therefore occupies the four first sections of his work, with considering the imaginary gradations between the different kingdoms of nature, and disproving their existence.

If there be a gradation of perfection, he contends, there must be a rank, not only in the different classes, but among the species. If this be supposed to be the case among animals in some instances, (though by far the greater number of these appear to have equal rights to preeminence,) to which of the minerals shall we assign the preference?

• Which of the trees of the forest is the inferior...would bow to the other? and ought a plant of wheat to be considered as beneath them? Has not every vegetable a right to claim pre-eminence,...for usefulness, for beauty, or for hardiness? One grows where another cannot, another grows more luxuriantly.' p. 15.

The gradation from a mineral to a vegetable, is so untenable, as to need little refutation,

The law by which the increase of minerals is accomplished is proper only to minerals; it is that of affinity and not of assimilation: hence the two kingdoms are not only kept distinct, but at the remotest distance. It is in vain to talk of kindred, if the principle of existence be different P. 18.

In considering the connexion between vegetables and animals, Dr. J. endeavours to prove, that the motion of plants, resembling muscular irritability, is the consequence of increased or diminished strength, occasioned by internal causes, which they can neither seek for nor prevent; and he suggests, that the accommodation of plants to the seasons of different climates, is merely owing to the different effect of solar heat in different countries. Here, by the way, the Doctor asserts, that "a muscle can only act, when it has passed over a joint, and is attached to two bones;" how does he account for the motion of the heart, or the actions of other muscles of the trunk, which pass over no joint? Speaking of the ascent of the sap, he says;

Το

Could we discover the principle on which sap rises, it might be of incalculable utility in the business of life,...and why may we not discover it? It is not raised by a miracle, but by the use of natural means. learn what these are, is not, I apprehend, a study beyond the human capacity. The circulation of the blood was as little known, and presented as many difficulties, till Dr. Harvey investigated the subject and made it easy of comprehension: the discovery was but of yesterday. To elevate water, without the complicated and expensive machinery now in use, might be one consequence of a knowledge of the principle we have been speakng of; and thus a new and extensive field of interesting investigation, ad of practical utility, be opened to science. But though the subject is et enveloped in darkness we know enough to be confident that the princi

1

ple which moves the sap, and circulates the blood, is not the same.' pp. 26, 27.

We confess that our hopes of its being thus applicable, even should it be discovered, are very slender indeed! Waving however these considerations, he lays the principal stress of his argument upon the following reasoning:

A chain implies progression, and as an animal is indisputably advanced beyond a vegetable, the point of union must be between the most complete and perfect vegetable and the most insignificant and doubtful animal. A polypus bears this character: it was long supposed to be a plant, but now is placed in the rank of animals, and is said to catch and devour flies, which is conclusive as to the kingdom to which it belongs. Let us take it, with all our ignorance respecting it, as the lowest of animals ; and as all animals are superior to vegetables, the next link consequently is the most perfect of that order, and which is more so than an oak! But it is truly ridiculous to speak of these being united as parts of a chain. An oyster has no affinity to a cedar, or a grasshopper to any other tree, and they are the most fit and apposite links that I can discover....There cannot be a scale of progression, if the most complete and perfect of one order does not bear a resemblance to the least perfect of the order next above it. A chain supposes a connexion and resemblance, but no animal in the creation corresponds to a forest tree.' p. 27.

In refuting the idea of a connexion between man, and the brute, the question, whether reason and instinct be radically distinct, is discussed at some length.

"Can it be ascertained that there exists a real distinction between instinct and reason? It can. Were it not so, it would be in vain to contend for man's immortality, or the meanest animal would have an equal claim. To differ only in degree is scarcely worth contending for: the difference, in order to be valued, must be essential. The one is not, cannot be, a part or property of the other. Reason is the glory that encircles man; he may dim its lustre, or add to its brightness: but instinct is without glory, it receives not honor, nor suffers shame. Reason presents the human race at the footstool of their Maker, to adore and worship him; it is man's highest, his greatest honor: but instinct grovels in the dust; it soars no higher than the wants of the body...it is a provision to preserve life.

'I wish not to pass by, or to detract from, the endowments of animals; I would not rob them of the smallest gift to place it on the head of man : the human race would be degraded by their highest endowments. I allow all that is asked for them,...memory, contrivance, foresight; and I allow that instinct admits of improvement, by the use of these endowments.

Where then, it may be asked, is the distinction, where the separating wall, between instinct and reason? It is here it is in the object on which the capacity given can be employed. The mole that digs a hole to hide itself, discharges the highest duties of its nature, and displays the utmost sagacity of instinct; but man erects an altar to his God.' pp. 33, 34.

Dr. Jarrold treats this part of his subject, if not with all the precision of the dispassionate philosopher, with all the1.

warmth which is due to so interesting a topic; and draws, from the innate perfection of instinct, and the imperfection of reason, a powerful argument for the presumption of a future state. We were rather surprised, that among the various distinctions between the two he has not mentioned the formation or invention of speech, (loquela) which reason has enabled man to develope out of the voice, (vor) which he has in common with the brute.

In the fourth section, intitled, 'An inquiry into the relation, the parts which compose the world, and its inhabitants, bear to each other,' our author sums up the arguments against the system of gradation; and, classing the method of God in creating the world among those subjects which are beyond our comprehension, insists strongly upon the pernicious consequences of aiming at unattainable knowledge,

In the following section, he resumes the position, that the human race is of one species; and produces a number of circumstances, in which all periods and nations coincide. Mentioning afterwards the diversity of colour, he thinks the difference of complexion an indication, that we might expect the darkest shade, or black; and though the colour of the Negrobe so permanent in the individual, yet that its being entirely obliterated by intermarriages, without an effort of nature to preserve it, proves it to be not inherently implanted in his frame, but the effect of circumstances. Analogy from experiments on plants, however, greatly lessens the strength of this conclusion: indeed Dr. J. dismisses it with the following question,

Allowing, if it be proved, that black is a colour natural to man, and that it exists independent of external circumstances, would even this amount to a full and complete demonstration, that there was a difference of species between persons of opposite colour? Among animals, colour is not considered as relating to the species, why then should it be in the human race?' P. 31.

He then proceeds to examine the difference in form, which occupies the remaining twelve sections of the first part; deferring the consideration of the causes that occasion the colour of the skin.

The measurements of Negroes and Europeans by Mr. White, in order to prove that the ulna in the former is longer in proportion than in the latter, are amply discussed in the sixth section and Dr. J. adds the measurements of 32 other persons, principally North Britons, of several apes, and of a few antique statues. Reducing the length of the ulna to a decimal of the whole height, we have obtained the following results; which we apprehend will convey a clearer idea of their

aim and importance, than the tables of actual length inserted. by Dr. Jarrold.

White's 12 Negroes

Greatest Least Mean

,18085 ,16287 1717

12. Europeans

,15953

,14869 ,1524

Jarrold's 32 ditto

,17543 ,15463 ,166

,3324

,21138

Antinous

,17361

Apollo Belvedere

,17378

This greater length of the African ulna, Dr. J. accounts for, by remarking, that under the torrid zone, the period of adolescence, at which the arms commence a more rapid growth, which continues till the fabric is completed,' begins earlier than in temperate climates, though it continues as long.-We believe he has made a mistake, in asserting, that the humerus of the monkey is twice the length of that of a man, estimating according to the height of the body.' In the Jocko, and lesser Gibbon, the only two in which the entire length is mentioned, the humerus is ,28048 and ,28077 of the whole height; while the shortest human humerus in his 32 measurements is,1944, or about two thirds of that length.

(To be concluded in the next Number.)

Art. X. A new Dictionary of the English Language: by John Pytches, Esq. late Member of Parliament for the Borough of Sudbury. Part. I. sm. folio, pp. 28. Price 2s. 6d. Phillips, 1808.

A LIVING language is essentially changeable; and the

utility of works that are designed to restrict its metamorphoses, can only be partial and temporary. We are therefore by no means adverse to the project of a new English Dictionary, although we have repeatedly expressed our resentment of the rude and indecent censures which modern pretenders to lexicography have lavished on that of Johnson, Having long been hackneyed in the ways of men, we have learned shrewdly to suspect the character of any person, and of any book, whose merit requires to be evinced by the depreciation of others. Consequently, the following passage in Mr. P.'s preface has produced an effect on our expectations from his work, very different from that which he probably wished it to impress on his readers.

• Doctor Johnson's Dictionary (though it has some claim to originality. and supremacy) is a defective, a trecherous, and an ill-arranged composi

tion:

VOL.V.

Deform'd, unfinish'd, sent before its time
Into this breathing world, scarce half made up,

G

Shakspere.