hand of Mr. Nodder. The text accompanying them, it must be acknowledged, is much to the purpose; but the author appears at present to be more brief and laconic in his descriptions than he originally proposed. Both Mr. Sowerby and Mr. Donovan continue their laudable exertions to render their countrymen familiar with indigenous natural productions, the former in his "British Miscellany,” the latter in his "Birds and Insects of Great Britain.” The figures they give are of various and unequal merit.
Botany has of late offered a richer harvest than the other branches of natural science. Not half a century ago, when the knowledge of the vegetable world was thought to possess no charms beyond those derived from converting herbs into nauseous medicines, this lovely science was almost exclusively cultivated by the physician and druggist; and “what is it good for?” was the first question suggested by the sight of a new or unknown plant. But when a less selfish philosophy taught us that vegetables, as well as other objects, are capable of creating interest, and of affording rational pleasure, by the beauty of their form alone, and by the various relations in which we see them; and when thus the idea of physic merged in one far more pleasing, botany gradually became the general and favourite pursuit of the cultivated part of society, and proved a study equally well adapted to the turn of mind of the gravest philosopher, and to the task of the gayest among the fair, provided her heart be still open to those softer emotions which the contemplation of blooming nature seldom fails to produce. Indigenous botany appears to possess a greater number of votaries in this than in an other country, and publications relating to it are for the most part favourably received. But none, we suppose, ever met with greater success than "English Botany,” the result of the joint labours of Dr. Smith and Dr. Sowerby; and deservedly too, for we know of no work on the Continent that can be compared with it: when completed, this work will be indispensable to the student of indigenous botany. Curtis’s "Botanical Magazine,” continued, ever since the death of the original author, by Dr. John Sims, is the best conducted work of this kind we possess: the figures, by Mr. Edwards, though small, are uncommonly characteristic; and Dr. Sims’s text, though often very concise, is amusing and instructive. Mr. Gawler, a gentleman who has made the liliaceous plants his particular study, likewise furnishes materials for this work, which appears to have a greater sale than any other publication of this kind, either in this country or abroad. A comparatively new periodical work is Mr. Hooker’s "Paradisus Londinensis,” written by Mr. Salisbury, a profound botanist, though too much addicted to paradoxes. Mr. Hooker’s figures are elegant, and upon the whole, botanically correct. We wish this publication may not be discontinued. Mr. Andrews’s "Botanist Repository" is taken up again, and continues to make the lovers of exotic botany acquainted with many curious productions of our hot-houses and gardens. Mr. Andrews’s style of painting is peculiar to himself: the "Heaths" and "Roses" of this artist are well known to ama-
