Dublin University Magazine, July, 1875.
“The principal articles in this volume that have reference to natural
history originally appeared in _Land and Water_, and are, in many
respects, highly interesting. Concerning vipers and snakes, we are
presented with a good deal of information that is instructive, not only
as regards their habits generally, but also with respect to points that
are in dispute among naturalists.” “For instance, it is a vexed question
whether, under any circumstances, the young retreat into the stomach
[inside] of the mother snake. A great authority, [?] Mr. Frank Buckland,
affirms that they do not; while our author is as positive that they do.
And he certainly, with reason, contends that the question is entirely one
of evidence, and, therefore, should be settled ‘as a fact is proved in a
court of justice; difficulties, suppositions, or theories not being
allowed to form part of the testimony. In support of his own views, Mr.
Simson has collected a large body of evidence that undoubtedly appears
authentic and conclusive.” “Of the miscellaneous papers in this volume,
the best is a critical study of the late John Stuart Mill. Taken
altogether, the volume is very entertaining, and affords pleasing and
instructive reading.”
Evening Standard, June 8, 1875.
“It is with real pleasure we see these Contributions to _Land and Water_
no longer limited to the columns of a newspaper, whatever may be its
circulation. For the excellence and charm of these papers we must refer
the reader to the volume before us, which cannot fail to interest and
instruct its readers. Their variety and range may be gathered from the
subjects treated:—Snakes, Vipers, English Snakes, Waterton as a
Naturalist, John Stuart Mill, History of the Gipsies, and the Duke of
Argyll on the Preservation of the Jews.”
London Courier, June, 1875.
“The Natural History Contributions, which are very interesting, though
partaking largely of a controversial nature, deal chiefly with questions
affecting snakes and vipers. Of the other Contributions, the most
attractive and readable is the one which contests some of Mr. Borrow’s
conclusions in his well-known account of the Gipsies. Mr. John Stuart
Mill forms the subject of a slashing dissertation, which is not likely to
find much favour with the friends of the departed philosopher.”
Rochdale Observer, June 19, 1875.
“The study of natural history has a peculiar charm for most people, but
for Lancashire folk it seems to have a special interest. Perhaps the
most striking feature of the book at the head of this notice is the
variety of topics touched upon; topics which, although apparently
incompatible and incongruous, are, nevertheless, both curious and
interesting. The author certainly brings a large amount of special
knowledge to the discussion of the questions he introduces, and the
essays are undoubtedly well written. Our readers will see that the work
is full of controversial matter, embracing natural history, theology, and
biography, and consequently will suit the taste of those who like to
enter into discussions which excite the feelings, and in which abundance
of energy and ability is displayed. The book is certainly ably written,
and the author shows himself to be a man of large accomplishments.”
Liverpool Albion, June 18, 1875.
“The articles are written in a very readable manner, and will be found
interesting even by those who have no special knowledge of natural
history or interest in it. The Gipsies are competitors with the snakes
for Mr. Simson’s regards, and several papers are devoted to these
mysterious nomadic tribes. Perhaps the most curious paper in the volume
is written to prove that John Bunyan was a Gipsy, and a very fair case is
certainly made out, principally from Bunyan’s own autobiographical
statements. With the exception of the papers on John Stuart Mill, to
which we have already alluded, and which are far worse than worthless,
the book is one which we can recommend.”
Newcastle Courant, June 11, 1875.
“The bulk of these Contributions appeared in _Land and Water_. We think
the author has done well to give them to the public in the more enduring
form of a well got up volume. The book contains, also, a critical sketch
of the career of John Stuart Mill; some gossip about Gipsies; and the
Duke of Argyll’s notions about the preservation of the Jews. Altogether,
the book is very readable.”
Northern Whig, June 17, 1875.
“This volume consists of Contributions to _Land and Water_ by a writer
well-known as the author [editor] of a standard book on the Gipsies, and
is evidently the production of a clear, intelligent, and most observant
mind. Mr. Simson adds a number of miscellaneous papers, including a
masterly, though severe, criticism of John Stuart Mill—‘his religion, his
education, a crisis in his history, his wife, Mill and son,’—as well as
several desultory papers on the Gipsies, elicited, for the most part, by
criticisms on his work on that singular race.”
Western Times, June 29, 1875.
“The preface to this volume is dated from New York, and the contents bear
marks of the free, racy style of transatlantic writers. The volume
closes with a paper on the ‘Preservation of the Jews.’ The writer deals
with his several subjects with marked ability, and his essays form a
volume which will pay for reading, and therefore pay for purchasing.”
Daily Review, June 11, 1875.
“We need only mention the other subjects—Waterton as a Naturalist,
Romanism, John Stuart Mill, Simson’s History of the Gipsies, Borrow on
the Gipsies, the Scottish Churches and the Gipsies, Was John Bunyan a
Gipsy? and, of course, the literary ubiquitous Duke of Argyll on the
Preservation of the Jews. The only paper we have not ventured to look at
is the last, in the dread that on this question the versatile Duke might
be found, as in the matter of the Scottish Church, verifying the French
proverb—_Il va chercher midi à quatorze heures_—a work in which the
author of this volume is an adept, in quiet, quaint, and clever ways,
however, which make it interesting.”