Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

That sav'd and shelter'd it, there grew one flow'r
Beneath the night-shade of this rugged breast!---
That flow'r, hath wither'd in its brightest bloom,
Nipp'd by the blasting of a cruel frost !---
Life is a leafless desart now!---a waste,
With all its burst of feeling unemploy'd !---
Farewell! thou fire-ey'd soul of enterprise,
That canopied beneath my glittering flag,
Turn'd even danger to delight!-Farewell!--
The link that bound me to thy hope, is rent!---
(Looking passionately on Medora.)

Farewell!---Farewell!--

[blocks in formation]

We shall leave our readers to pronounce what praise is due to Mr. Holland for his labours. In our opinion, it was injudicious in him, to undertake to alter what he was unable to improve. He seems indeed more closely to have copied the faults, than to have imitated the beauties of his prototype. For instance, Lord Byron has the following prosaic coupletThus with himself communion held he-till He reach'd the summit of his tower-crown'd hill.

Mr. Holland did not suffer a fancied felicity of this kind to escape him-though not tempted to the commission of it, even by the exigency of rhyme. Thus we have, in the very first scene

Where is our Chief? We bring him tidings that
Must make our greetings short-

Immediately afterwards is a reiteration
of this happy use of the conjunctive—
On Juan-on-inform our Chieftain, that
We bring him tidings he must quickly hear-
An approximation to the same forcible
style of versification may, again, be found
in the following lines-

For I am as a fragment shivered from
The rock, that storms have shattered-

We shall dismiss the melo-drama here; -but as we have not, heretofore, had an

opportunity of treating of the poem of the Corsair, we will devote a few moments to the consideration of the character of Conrad, as delineated by Lord Byron.

He

We have often objected to his lordship's taste in the selection of his heroes. has generally endeavoured, and sometimes too successfully, to engage our sympathies in behalf of those who were unworthy of our regard,-not only from the character of the sufferers, but from the nature of their distresses. The miseries on which he has most pathetically expatiated, have, usually, been either the merited rewards of crime, or the inevitabie consequences of folly,--and not unfre

quently the result of a combination of both flagitiousness and imbecility. To attempt to hold up as objects of generous compassion those who have involved themselves, by reprehensible means, in useless disasters-which they have neither is to rob real misfortune of its rights, the wit to evade, nor the fortitude to bear and to encroach upon the prerogative of virtuous wo. The least we can demand of such, is, that they should summon the manliness to endure that wretchedness, voke. There is, indeed, a due allowance which they have had the audacity to proto be made for human weakness, and it is not requisite that one should be perfectly innocent, nor wholly amiable, to be the when overtaken by calamity. AH who subject of the warmest commiseration, have felt the force of temptation, can extenuate the guilt of those who have sunk beneath it; but to discover a predilection for the base, to court occasions of turpitude, to exhibit ignoble daring, to challenge fate, and to set justice at defiance, is to forfeit every claim to either charity or condolence, in the hour of retribution. Yet we can believe that those who have perpetrated the greatest atrocities, have not always been those who were naturally most prone to vice. On the contrary, malicious dispositions are commonly associated with a mean capacity-and they who are continually imagining evil, are least competent to compass splendid mischiefs. There have, unhappily, been too many great minds that, in the salience of indignation, under the real or fancied injuries of the world, have

Leap'd at the stars, and landed in the mud.

Over the aberrations of these, we sigh; -regret for the perversion of talents, is mingled with mourning for the exasperation which produced it. We even form some inadequate idea of the dreadful conflict, waged by contending emotions, in the bosoms of honourable men, ere wicked counsels triumphed. We see them buffeting the torrent of adversity,

With lusty sinews, throwing it aside, And stemming it with hearts of controversy. We see them, at last, borne down by the unremitting vigour of the stream, fill they are forced to the precipice, and make the desperate plunge.

Conrad is described as one in whom the milk of human kindness had been curdled by the acerbity of his experience. Disappointment had corroded his better feelings, and oppression and deceit had

driven him to indiscriminate retaliation. derness eradicated from the bosom of The poet pourtrays his heart and temper at the time we are brought acquainted with him-but pursues,

"Yet was not Conrad thus by Nature sent To lead the guilty---guilt's worst instrument--His soul was changed, before his deeds had

driven

Him forth to war with man and forfeit heaven.
Warped by the world in Disappointment's school,
In words too wise, in conduct there a fool;
Too firm to yield, and far too proud to stoop,
Doom'd by his very virtues for a dupe,
He cursed those virtues as the cause of ill,
And not the traitors who betrayed him still;
Nor deemed that gifts bestowed on better men
Had left him joy, and means to give again.
Fear'd---shunn'd---belied---ere youth had lost
her force,

He hated man too much to feel remorse,
And thought the voice of wrath a sacred call,
To pay the injuries of some on all.
He knew himself a villain---but he deemed
The rest no better than the thing he seemed;
And scorned the best as hypocrites who hid
Those deeds the bolder spirit plainly did.
He knew himself detested, but he knew
The hearts that loathed him, crouched and
dreaded too.

Lone, wild, and strange, he stood alike exempt
From all affection and from all contempt:
His name could sadden, and his acts surprise;
But they that feared him dared not to despise :
Man spurns the worm, but pauses ere he wake
The slumbering venom of the folded snake."

Still was not every sentiment of ten

Conrad. His love for Medora, was ardent, delicate, exclusive. To her he was all gentleness. Before her he stifled every pang that racked his thoughts, and even assumed a cheerfulness foreign to his nature. The intensity of his affection for her, was proportionate to his detestation of the mass of mankind; and such as phlegmatic philanthropists cannot comprehend. It is this single trait-his sensibility to female loveliness, his fidelity, his devotedness, to her whose faith he had received, that redeems him from the vile;

"He left a Corsair's name to other times, Link'd with one virtue, and a thousand crimes."

Whether one so steeped in guilt, so imbrued in blood, as Conrad, could retain such fervor and purity of passion, conjoined with such scrupulousness of respect and deference for the one object of his devotion, may, indeed, be doubted ;-yet if it were so, it cannot be denied that he is, in one regard, entitled to our reverence and admiration. We do not the less esteem the solitary flower that blows on the barren waste, for the sterility that surrounds it, we probably prize it dearer than if it bloomed in the gaudy parterre. E.

ART. 3. A Sketch of the Botany of South-Carolina and Georgia. By STEPHEN ELLIOTT, Esq. &c. &c. Charleston. 1817. 5 Numbers, 8vo. each of 100 pages, with some plates; to be continued.

UNDER

INDER the above unassuming title, one of the most learned and elaborate works, ever published in the United States, on Natural Sciences, is making its appearance: being at the same time the first botanical work, written in our country, in which, original, accurate and complete descriptions of our indigenous plants, are given in our vernacular language and on scientific principles. The modesty of its author can only be equalled by his talents; and the multiplicity of his discoveries and researches, by the happy manner in which he conveys to us the knowledge of their results. We have not often the opportunity to witness such a worthy association; and we feel proud in this instance to have it in our power to delineate some of its features. We, therefore, avail ourselves of it at an early period, and before the completion of the work, since the parts before us afford a fair specimen of the whole; and we entertain no doubt

that the remainder, which is in forwardness, will appear in a state of improvement rather than otherwise.

We had perceived with pleasure some late attempts to convey the botanical knowledge of our plants, in the English language: in Pursh's Flora of North America, and in the translation of the Flora of Louisiana, although the generic and specific characters are given in Latin, the old classical language of Botany, yet the occasional descriptions and observations are in English; while in Bigelow's Florula of Boston, and in the Manual of the Botany of the Northern States, the whole is in that language; but in this last work, short definitions only are given, and in the former, mere short and often imperfect descriptions. The work before us has not only entire and complete English descriptions, but also generic and specific definitions in both languages: uniting, therefore, the advantages derived from

both modes. Local Floras

may always be written, with great Propriety, in the ernacular language of the country for which they intended; while general Florasi written in such languages, ought to have the characters of at least all new genera and species, in both languages, Latin and vernacular, as Mr. Elliott has given them; or have a separate Latin synopsis, after the manner of that for Decandolle's valuable French Flora; although the French language is, next to Latin, a classical one in Europe. These additions are required in order that the works may be read by all the botanists and men of science, of different nations, spreading thereby with rapidity individual discoveries. But if the Latin language may be dispensed with in many instances, it is not so with Latin binarian names, which are the real botanical names, common to all nations of European origin: every work neglecting them must be deemed unclassical and unworthy of notice.

The southern states are richer in vegetable productions than the northern, since they approach nearer to the tropical climates, where are the seats of luxuriant vegetation, and they enjoy a lengthened period of warm temperature, fit for the support of vegetable life. We find, accordingly, that they afford a numberless variety of brilliant flowers and conspicuous plants, which have attracted, at all periods, the notice of botanists and gardeners, most of which are peculiar to their climate, and unknown to the northern states, disappearing gradually as they advance toward the pole. There are two principal nucleus in the botany of the Atlantic states, one exists in the chain of the Alleghany mountains, from which the plants springing therefrom, extend on each side to the northward, while many are confined to the mountains towards the south the second is to be traced on the Atlantic shore, and possesses features of the most peculiar character. Its range, wider in the south, becomes narrow towards the north, and in the New England states, it is confined to the margin of the sea-shore. An investigation of this subject would perhaps be interesting, but might lead us into remote discussions. It may, however, be safely inferred, that out of 3000 species, growing in Carolina and Georgia, only 1000 are also found north of Maryland, while the remainder are peculiar to those states, except a very few common to Virginia and Maryland. Many genera are peculiar to the southern region, and unknown north of the PotoVOL. 111,-No. M.

13

mac; such as, Zamia, Chamerops, Dionea, Brunnichia, Eriogonum, Boerhavia, Pistia, Epidendrum, Tillandsia, Thalia, Elytraria, Callicarpa, Stillingia, Bejaria, Gordonia, &c. and many more.

Notwithstanding the exuberant luxuriancy of vegetation, in Carolina, which appeared to invite the attention of European travellers and settlers at an early period, we find that its vegetable treasures have not begun to be collected and investigated, until long after those of the more northern states; which may partly be accounted for, by the later settlement of the country, and the unhealthy state of the climate. Catesby appears to be the first who, nearly a century ago, began to explore that state for natural productions, and he has figured many trees and shrubs, together with some plants, in his great work on the birds and animals of Carolina, &c.; but the imperfect state of natural sciences in his time, render his unmeaning descriptions, obsolete names, and inaccurate figures, of little use at present, except as historical references. Garden and Bartram visited that country after him; but few of their discoveries were published, and a long period elapsed before Walter, who had resided a long time in Carolina, published, in London, his Flora of that state. His work was in Latin, and in the Linnæan style, containing a vast number of new plants, most of which were, however, so concisely characterised, that they could hardly be distinguished from their congenera; the existence of many was even doubted; but Mr. Elliott has since had the honour to confirm nearly all Walter's discoveries. Walter had also many new genera which were fully characterised; but for which he had not the ability to frame names! ushering them under the the term of ancnyma. The consequence has been that they have been named by other botanists, who have reaped all the honour, since the name of the author of a new genus, is only affixed to it, when it is introduced into the nomenclature by receiving a botanical name, and a good one. Michaux resided likewise, at different times, in Carolina, and has published his discoveries in his General Flora of the United States. Many other travellers, such as, Fraser, Lyon, Enslen, Kin, Nuttall, &c. have visited South-Carolina and Georgia, and their discoveries have been partly published by Lamark, Sims, and Pursh. This last author having never visited those states, is very deficient and inaccurate in the enumeration of southern plants, included in his Flora of North America,

which renders still more valuable the additions which Mr. Elliott has been able to make to our knowledge of southern botany. These additions, exclusive of the many restored plants of Walter, amount to more than we could have anticipated, and will certainly claim the best attention of all the botanists, not only at home, but in Europe likewise.

Mr. Elliott appears to have received considerable aid from many gentlemen residing in South-Carolina and Georgia: we were not aware that there existed so many zealous botanists and amateurs in those states; we hail the intelligence with high gratification; and feel a pleasure in the expectation, that this work is likely to extend the taste for the blooming objects of botanical science; a science which is continually unfolding the secret stores of divine wisdom; which nurses the best sentiments of the heart, and is constantly supplying means to increase our comforts and relieve our wants.

Among these generous contributors, we ought to notice particularly Mr. Laconte, one of our ablest botanists, who has visited all the Atlantic states, and whose labours and discoveries will soon be published in a Botanical Synopsis, upon the construction of which he has been engaged for many years: Dr. Baldwin, who has studied with attention the plants of Georgia the late Drs. Brickell and Macbride, whose extensive acquirements have thrown much light on many natural subjects; (this latter gentleman particularly, has communicated many valuable notices on the medical properties of some plants) Lewis de Schweinitz of NorthCarolina, and many other gentlemen of South-Carolina and Georgia, such as Messrs. Herbemont, Jackson, Oemler, Pinkney, Moulins, Bennet, Green, Habersuam, &c. Mr. Elliott had also kept up a regular correspondence with the late R. D. Henry Muhlenberg of Lancaster, and has acquired, by a communication of specimens with him, a perfect knowledge of the results of his unpubAished labours, many of which appear now, for the first time, in this work, although they had been enumerated in Muhlenberg's Catalogue, but not described.

We have the first five numbers of this work before us, which include, from the class Monandria to the class Decandria, er about one third part of the whole labour, and contain nearly 1000 species, whereof more than 120 are new species, unnoticed by Pursh, and described for the first time in this work. Several new genera are also introduced here for the first

re

ach

time, at whicated from the bosom of add about 25 g for Medora, was arnew species, to thee. To her he waf American botany, rather he stifler added by the Flora of Purs, this work is superior in almost every point of view. Among the new species described in these five numbers, 14 had been already named by Muhlenberg in his Catalogue; 8 have been discovered by Dr. Baldwin; 4 by Mr. Laconte; some by Dr. Macbride and Mr. Lyon; while nearly 100 have been discovered, determined, described and named by Mr. Elliott himself. These new species belong to the following genera: Gratiola 3, N.Sp. Lindernia 1, Micranthemum 1, Utricularia 4, Lycopus 2, Salvia 2, Collinsonia 2, Erianthus 2, Xyris 2, Rhynchospora 4, Cyperus 4, Mariscus 1, Scirpus 9, Dichromena 1, Paspalum 3, Panicum 20, Agrostis 3, Poa 6, Aristida 3, Andropogon 5, Aira 2, Uniola 1, Eleusine 1, Houstonia 1, Ludwigia 4, Villarsia 1, Hottonia 1, Phlox 1, Lysimachia 1, Ophiorhiza 1, Sabbattia 2, Viola 1, Asclepias 3, Hydrolea 1, Eryngium 2, Hydrocotyle 2, Ammi 1, Sium 2, Drosera 1, Tillandsia 1, Pontederia 1, Allium 1, Juneus 3, Rumex 1, Tofidda 1, Trillium 2, Rhexia 1, Polygonum 1, Baptisia 1, Cassia 1, Andromeda 1.

Besides the above material addition of new species, we find that many genera contain the descriptions of a great number of species, becoming almost complete monographies of said genera; among those we shall mention the following genera: Panicum, which contains 45 species! Gratiola 8, Utricularia 9, Collinsonia 7, Cyperus 24, Scirpus 31, Paspalum 11, Andropogon 12, Poa 19, Ludwigia 15, Phlox 17, Asclepias 18, Trillium 9, Andromeda 16, &c.

The new genera will deserve our paticular attention, since they become the types of the most important collective aggregate of individuals, which derive their name and characteristic features from them. They are scattered in the following order.

Lachnanthes. Mr. Elliott gives this new name to the Heritiera of Gmelin and Michaux, or Dilatris of Persoon and Pursh, which he proves to be distinct from the last genus, while the former denomination has now changed its object: the Convitylis of Pursh, or rather Lophiola of Bot. Mag. is quite different from it, by the double number of stamina.

Aularanthus. Triandria digynia. Flowers in panicles. Calyx 2 valved, 1 flowered; valves equal furrowed. Corolla bivalve, valves nearly equal. A. N. G.

differing from Panicum by the furrowed calyx and absence of an accessory valve. The type of it is the Phalaris villosa of Michaux, which Elliot calls A. ciliatus, and to which he adds a second species A. rufus.

Monocera. Triandria digynia. Flowers lateral. Calyx 3 valved multiflore, valves awned below the summit. Herm. fl. Corolla 2 valved, unequal; the exterior valve awned below the summit. Neut. fl. Corolla 2 valved unawned. This N. G. is intermediate between Eleusine and Chloris: it is formed upon the Chloris monostachya of Lin. but the name is erroneous, there being already a genus of univalve shells called by a similar name by Lamark, &c. It must, therefore, be changed into Triatherus, meaning three bristles, since the calyx or glume has so many : the specific name will be T. aromaticus. Lyonia. Pentandria digynia. Pollen masses 10 smooth pendulous. Stamineal crown 5 leaved, the leaves flat erect. Stigma conical 2 cleft. Corolla 1 petal, campanulate. Follicles smooth. N. G. is formed upon the Ceropegia palustris of Pursh, or Cynanchum angustifolium of Muhlenberg. The name happens to be as erroneous as the above, upon two evident principles: 1. because it is almost identical in sound with the genus Allionia; 2. because a genus was already dedicated to Mr. Lyon, in 1808, by Rafinesque, in the Medical Repository, formed of the Polygonella of Michaux, (also erroneous in name) which he has since rendered exact by calling it Lyonella. This genus might therefore be dedicated to the late worthy Dr. Macbride, and called Macbridea: specific name M. mara

tima.

This

Acerates. Differing from Asclepias by having no appendage in the auricles or crown. A similar name had been given previously by Persoon to a different genus: this, therefore, which ought perhaps to be a mere subgenus of Asclepias, must receive the name of Acerolis, meaning auricles without horns: the A. viridiflora of Rafinesque and Pursh may be united to it.

Podostigma. Corpuscle on a pedicel, pollen masses 10, &c. smooth, pendulous. Starineal crown 5 leaved, leaves compressed. Corolla campanulate, follicles smooth. Formed with the Asclepias viridis and A. pedicellata of Walter. A good name.

Lepuropetalon. Pentandria trigynia. Calyx 5 parted. Petals 5, resembling scales inserted on the calyx. Capsul free near the summit, 1 celled 3 valved. Next

to Turnera and scarcely distinct from it, the ovary is probably free altogether and covered by the base of the calyx at its base. Muhlenberg had united this genus with Pyxidanthera, which was wrong, since it has scarcely any affinity with it. The name of Lepuropetalon is rather too long, being in the same predicament with Symphoricarpos, Anapodophyllum, which have been shortened. This might, therefore, be shortened inte Petalepis, which has the same meaning.

Monotropsis. Schweinitz. Decandria monogynia. Calyx 5 leaved, leaves upright hooded, base unguiculate-gibbose. Corolla monopetal campanulated fleshy quinquefid. Nectary quinquefid. Stamina 10, a pair between each angle of the nectary. Ovary 5 gone, 1 style, stigma 5 valved. This new genus, which has been discovered in North-Carolina, by Mr. Schweinitz, belongs to the same natural family than the genera Monotropa and Hypopythis, notwithstanding the monopetalous corolla, since the stamina are not inserted thercon. The name given by the discoverer being objectionable, Mr. Elliott proposes to substitute therefor the name of Schweinitzea, which, we trust, will be acceded to. It contains only one species, S. odorata, which has the smell of the violet, the habit of Momoiropa, aggregated flowers of a whitish red colour, &c.

Mr. Elliott might have established several other new genera, and he has, in some instances, intimated the propriety of it; but a timidity, too general among the botanists of the strict Linnaan school, has prevented him from executing what he considered advisable. The following axiom ought to become a botanical rule: All the specics differing generically from their supposed congenera, must form scparate genera, since it flows from the evident botanical laws, that, a genus is a collection of consimilar species, and that consimilar objects are to be united, while dissimilar objects are to be divided. The multiplicity of genera, far from being contrary to the correct principles of the science, as some botanists have wrongly conceived, is conducive to the gradual improvement of it, since it takes place only when new observations of characters prove the necessity of such an increase.

The shape and style of the whole work is strictly Linnæan; but in the synoptical view of the genera belonging to each class, they are deprived of their definitions, which is, perhaps, an oversight, but an objectionable one. The characters o the genera are only synoptical, they are

« ForrigeFortsæt »