-
Articles/Ads
Article Untitled Article ← Page 2 of 6 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Untitled Article
fluids of the predisposed , a fructifying soil , on which they rapidly multiply and increase . The subject has , of late , derived much interest from the repeated visitations of cholera . Living ieings are divided into animals and vegetables ; and these
differ from each other on many points ; yet there are certain objects of doubtful character , which seem to belong either to both the animal and vegetable kingdoms , or to neither . It is on this account that naturalists have sought for a definition of these kingdoms , that would enable them at once to refer to one or the other , the various objects in nature .
With this view , Linnaeus laid down the following axiom : " Mineralia crescunt : vegetabilia crescunt et vivunfc ; animalia crescunt , vivunt , et sentiunt . " But this will not assist the naturalist much . The mineral kingdom is , perhaps , not often confounded with the other two , although its distinction , as we have shown , could not always depend on the definition of Linnaeus . The distinction here
given between the animal and vegetable kingdoms is the possession of sensation by the former . But how is sensation to be determined ? If by movements from external stimuli , then ought the sensitiveplant and dionoea to be called animals , and sponges and jelly-fishes plants ; if , on the other hand , the possession of a nervous system is to determine the point , then , as we have failed to demonstrate this
in the sponges and polyps , they must still be called plants . Cuvier defined an animal by its possession of a stomach ; but this fails of being a distinctive mark in many of the lower classes of what are generally admitted as animals ; and the Aristotelian indication , the possession of a mouth , cannot be always applied . There is , in fact , still a great difficulty in determining the limits of the vegetable and animal kingdoms ; and botanists and zoologists are constantly
putting in their claims for the right of exclusive study of certain beings which exist at the point where the animal and vegetable kingdoms meet . The following is the definition of a plant by an eminent botanist , and is perhaps as good as can be given in the present state of our knowledge : " A plant is a living body deprived of sensation or power of moving from place to place , and fed by means of external roots . " Another eminent naturalist describes
every animal as a tube , every vegetable as a root . The more we examine nature , however , the more difficult it becomes to draw palpable distinctions . Our divisions of natural objects are made from their more obvious and striking differences ,, Hence we have long thought of the mineral , the animal , and the vegetable kingdoms as grand fundamental distinctions , which no man in his senses could
doubt or challenge ; little imagining that the microscope was destined to show us these three strange and dissimilar classes of created things , shading off one into the other by insensible degrees , until between each division we find myriads of beings which belong either to both or to neither . Thus these three grand divisions of nature melt into each other like the colours of the rainbow . So
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Untitled Article
fluids of the predisposed , a fructifying soil , on which they rapidly multiply and increase . The subject has , of late , derived much interest from the repeated visitations of cholera . Living ieings are divided into animals and vegetables ; and these
differ from each other on many points ; yet there are certain objects of doubtful character , which seem to belong either to both the animal and vegetable kingdoms , or to neither . It is on this account that naturalists have sought for a definition of these kingdoms , that would enable them at once to refer to one or the other , the various objects in nature .
With this view , Linnaeus laid down the following axiom : " Mineralia crescunt : vegetabilia crescunt et vivunfc ; animalia crescunt , vivunt , et sentiunt . " But this will not assist the naturalist much . The mineral kingdom is , perhaps , not often confounded with the other two , although its distinction , as we have shown , could not always depend on the definition of Linnaeus . The distinction here
given between the animal and vegetable kingdoms is the possession of sensation by the former . But how is sensation to be determined ? If by movements from external stimuli , then ought the sensitiveplant and dionoea to be called animals , and sponges and jelly-fishes plants ; if , on the other hand , the possession of a nervous system is to determine the point , then , as we have failed to demonstrate this
in the sponges and polyps , they must still be called plants . Cuvier defined an animal by its possession of a stomach ; but this fails of being a distinctive mark in many of the lower classes of what are generally admitted as animals ; and the Aristotelian indication , the possession of a mouth , cannot be always applied . There is , in fact , still a great difficulty in determining the limits of the vegetable and animal kingdoms ; and botanists and zoologists are constantly
putting in their claims for the right of exclusive study of certain beings which exist at the point where the animal and vegetable kingdoms meet . The following is the definition of a plant by an eminent botanist , and is perhaps as good as can be given in the present state of our knowledge : " A plant is a living body deprived of sensation or power of moving from place to place , and fed by means of external roots . " Another eminent naturalist describes
every animal as a tube , every vegetable as a root . The more we examine nature , however , the more difficult it becomes to draw palpable distinctions . Our divisions of natural objects are made from their more obvious and striking differences ,, Hence we have long thought of the mineral , the animal , and the vegetable kingdoms as grand fundamental distinctions , which no man in his senses could
doubt or challenge ; little imagining that the microscope was destined to show us these three strange and dissimilar classes of created things , shading off one into the other by insensible degrees , until between each division we find myriads of beings which belong either to both or to neither . Thus these three grand divisions of nature melt into each other like the colours of the rainbow . So