_Animal and Vegetable Physiology, considered with reference to Natural
Theology. By Peter Mark Roget, M.D. Secretary to the Royal Society,
&c. &c. 2 vols, large octavo. Philadelphia: Republished by Carey, Lea,
and Blanchard._
As we have no doubt that the great majority of our readers are
acquainted with the circumstances attending {202} the publication of
the Bridgewater Treatises, we shall content ourselves with a very
brief statement of those circumstances, by way of introduction to some
few observations respecting this, the fifth of the Series.
Francis Henry, Earl of Bridgewater, who died some time in the
beginning of the year 1829, directed certain Trustees mentioned in his
Will, to invest eight thousand pounds sterling in the public funds,
which eight thousand pounds, with the interest accruing, was to be
under the control of the President, for the time being, of the Royal
Society of London. The money thus invested, was to be paid by the
President to such person _or persons_ as he, the President, should
appoint to "write, print and publish, one thousand copies of a work,
_On the Power, Wisdom, and Goodness of God, as manifested in the
Creation; illustrating such work by all reasonable arguments, as, for
instance, the variety and formation of God's creatures, in the animal,
vegetable, and mineral kingdoms; the effect of digestion, and thereby
of conversion; the construction of the hand of man, and an infinite
variety of other arguments; as also by discoveries ancient and modern,
in arts, sciences, and the whole extent of literature_." The profits
of the works were to be paid to the authors.
Davies Gilbert, Esq. being President of the Royal Society, advised
with the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of London, and "_a
nobleman immediately connected with the deceased_," in regard to the
best mode of carrying into effect the design of the testator. It was
finally resolved to divide the eight thousand pounds among eight
gentlemen, who were to compose eight Treatises as follows. Thomas
Chalmers, D.D. Professor of Divinity in the University of Edinburgh,
was to write on "The Power, Wisdom, and Goodness of God, as manifested
in the Adaptation of External Nature to the Moral and Intellectual
Constitution of Man,"--John Kidd, M.D. F. R. S. Regius Professor of
Medicine in the University of Oxford, on "The Adaptation of External
Nature to the Physical Condition of Man,"--William Whewell, M.A. F. R.
S. Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, on "Astronomy and General
Physics considered with reference to Natural Theology,"--Sir Charles
Bell, K. G. H. F. R. S. L. and E. on "The Hand: its Mechanism and
Vital Endowments as Evincing Design,"--Peter Mark Roget, M.D. Fellow
of and Secretary to the Royal Society, on "Animal and Vegetable
Physiology,"--William Buckland, D.D. F. R. S. Professor of Geology in
the University of Oxford, on "Geology and Mineralogy,"--William Kirby,
M.A. F. R. S., on "The History, Habits, and Instincts of Animals"--and
William Prout, M.D. F. R. S., on "Chemistry, Meteorology, and the
Function of Digestion, considered with Reference to Natural Theology."
However excellent and praiseworthy the intention of the Earl of
Bridgewater, and however liberal the sum bequeathed, there can be
little doubt that in the wording of his bequest, in the encumbering of
the work so nobly proposed with a _specification of the arguments to
be employed in its execution_, he has offered a very serious
impediment to the fulfilment of the spirit of his design. It is
perhaps, too, a matter of regret, that the introduction of the words
"person or persons" in the paragraph touching the contemplated
publication, should have left it optional with the President of the
Royal Society to divide the eight thousand pounds among so many. We
are sorry that the eight treatises were determined upon for several
reasons. First, we do not believe any such arrangement to have been
contemplated by the testator--his words "write, print, and publish one
thousand copies of _a work_," &c., inducing the opinion that one
single book or treatise was intended: and we the rather hold to this
belief, as it might easily be proved (we will speak farther of this
hereafter,) that the whole argument set forth in the words of the
Testament, and indeed the whole arguments of the whole eight Treatises
now published, might have been readily discussed in one connected work
of no greater bulk than the _Physiology_ whose title forms the heading
of this article. In the second place--the bequest of the eight
thousand pounds, which _en masse_, is magnificent, and which might
thus have operated as a sufficient inducement for some one competent
person to devote a _sufficiency of time_ to the steady and gradual
completion of a noble and extraordinary work--this bequest, we say, is
somewhat of a common-place affair when we regard it in its
subdivision. Thirdly, one thousand pounds is but little for the labor
necessary in a work like any one of the Treatises, and we are mistaken
if the "profits of the sales" meet in any degree either the merits or
the expectations of the respective authors. If they do, however, it is
a matter altogether foreign to and apart from the liberality of the
testator--a liberality whose proper development should have been
scrupulously borne in view by the Trustee. Fourthly--the result of the
combination of a number of intellects is seldom in any case--never in
a case like the present--equal to the sum of the results of the same
intellects laboring individually--the difference, generally, being in
precise ratio with the number of the intellects engaged. It follows
that each writer of a Bridgewater Treatise has been employed at a
disadvantage. Lastly--an accurate examination of the nature and
argument of each Treatise as allotted, will convince one _a priori_
that the whole must, in any attempt at a full discussion, unavoidably
run one into the other--this indeed in so very great a degree that
each Treatise respectively would embody a vast quantity of matter,
(handled in a style necessarily similar) to be found in each and all
of the remaining seven Treatises. Here again is not only labor wasted
by the writers--but, by the readers of the works, much time and
trouble unprofitably thrown away. We say that this might have been
proved _a priori_ by an inspection of the arguments of the Treatises.
It has been fully proved, _a posteriori_, by the fact: and this fact
will go far in establishing what we asserted in our first reason for
disapproving of the subdivision--to wit: that the whole argument of
the whole eight Treatises might have been readily discussed in one
connected work of no greater bulk than the _Physiology_ now before us.
We cannot bring ourselves to think Dr. Roget's book the _best_ of the
Bridgewater series, although we have heard it so called. Indeed in the
very singular and too partial arrangement of the subjects, it would
have been really a matter for wonder if Dr. Whewell had not written
the _best_, and Sir Charles Bell the worst of the Treatises. The
talents of Dr. Roget, however, are a sufficient guarantee that he has
furnished no ordinary work. We are grieved to learn from the Preface
that his progress has been greatly impeded by "long protracted
anxieties and afflictions, and by the almost overwhelming pressure of
domestic calamity."
{203} The chief difficulty of the Physiologist in handling a subject
of so vast and almost interminable extent as the science to which his
labors have been devoted--a science comprehending all the animal and
vegetable beings in existence--has evidently been the difficulty of
selection from an exuberance of materials. He has excluded from the
Treatise--(it was necessary to exclude a great deal)--"all those
particulars of the natural history both of animals and plants, and all
description of those structures, of which the relation to final causes
cannot be distinctly traced." In a word, he has admitted such facts
alone as afford palpable evidence of Almighty design. He has also
abstained from entering into historical accounts of the progress of
discovery--the present state of Physiological science being his only
aim. The work is illustrated by nearly 500 wood cuts by Mr. Byfield,
and references in the Index to passages in the volumes where terms of
mere technical science have been explained. Appended are also a
catalogue of the engravings, and a tabular view of the classification
of animals adopted by Cuvier in his "_Regne Animal_" with examples
included. This Table is reprinted from that in the author's
"Introductory Lecture on Human and Comparative Physiology," published
in 1826. Such alterations, however, have been introduced as were
requisite to make the Table correspond with Cuvier's second edition.