Skip to main content

Full text of "The bicentenary of the birth of Carolus Linnaeus"

See other formats








Mrs. Frank R. Peabody 


Dr. Frank 15. Feabody 

i ir 


Annala N. Y. Acad. Sci., Vol. XVm, Part I, January, 1908. 


(ANNALS N.Y. ACAD. Sci., Vol. XVIII, No. 1, Part I, pp. 1-90. January, 1908.] V 


By EDMUND Ons JHovEY, <20(. . 
Recording Secretary. 

On May 23, 1907, the New York Academy of Sciences, in common with 
many other scientific societies and institutions throughout the world cele- 
brated the two hundredth anniversary of the great Swedish naturalist 
Carl von Linne", who is better known perhaps by his Latin name Linnaeus. 
In preparation for the event, the following invitation was sent out to 
sister societies throughout the world and to the Honorary Members of 
the Academy. 

The New York Academy of Sciences 

wfll celebrate on May 23, 1907, the 
Two Hundredth Anniversary of the Birth of Carl von Linne\ 

At this time, commemorative exercises will be held at 

The American Museum of Natural History, The New York Zoological Park, 

The New York Botanical Garden, The New York Aquarium, 

The Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences. 

A beautiful bridge crossing the Bronx River between the Botanical Garden and 
the Zoological Park will be dedicated to the distinguished Swedish naturalist. 

(The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences') 

is invited to take part in this celebration by contributing an official document, 
appreciative of the works of Linn, to be read before the members of the New 
York Academy of Sciences and assembled guests. 

A 7 . L. Britton, E. O. Hovey, 

President . Secretary . 

The invitation was accompanied by an illustration of the Linnaeus Bridge, 
to which reference was made. 

To all sister societies hi the United States, Canada and Mexico, the fol- 
lowing additional invitation was sent. 


(The National Academy of Sciences) 

is cordially invited by the 
New York Academy of Sciences 

to participate in its exercises 

commemorative of the two hundredth anniversary 
of the birth of the Swedish naturalist 

Carl von Linne* 

.through an authorized representative 

as well as by the official document asked for 

in the accompanying invitation 

An early reply is desired 

On the day of the anniversary the committee charged by the Council 
with making arrangements for the celebration carried out the following 



9: 00-12: 00. At the American Museum of Natural History 
Exhibition of American Animals known to Linnaeus 

Exhibition of Shells, Minerals and Rocks known to Linnaeus 

In charge of L. P. GRATACAP, E. O. HOVEY 

10: 30. Reading of letters from other Societies by the Secretary of the Academy 
11 : 15. Address by J. A. ALLEN on "Linnaeus and American Zoology" 


2:00-4:00. At the New York Botanical Garden, Museum Building, Bronx Park 
Exhibition of American Plants known to Linnaeus 

In charge of L. M. UNDERWOOD, J. K. SMALL, P. A. RYDBERG, M. A. HOWE, 

Exhibition of the Botanical Writings of Linnaeus and of Portraits of Linnaeus 

In charge of C. B. ROBINSON, J. H. BARNHART 

3: 10. Address by P. A. RYDBERG on "Linnaeus and American Botany" 
3:40. Exhibition of selected lantern slides of Flowers of North American 
Plants known to Linnaeus. In charge of H. H. RUSBY 

4: 00-4 : 30. Walk South from Museum Building through the Grounds of the Garden 

to the Linnaeus Bridge 
W. A. MURRILL will point out characteristic American trees known to Linnaeus 

4: 30. At the Bridge over the Bronx River on Pelham Parkway 
Address by the President of the Academy, and placing of documents in the tablet 
Singing by the AMERICAN UNION OF SWEDISH SINGERS: "Hear us, Svea" 


Acceptance of the tablet on behalf of the City of New York by the Hon. JOSEPH 
I. BERRY, Commissioner of Parks of the Borough of the Bronx 

Acceptance of the key of the tablet by the New York Historical Society for safe 
keeping until May 23, 1957 

Singing by the AMERICAN UNION OF SWEDISH SINGERS: "Battle Hymn" 

Address by G. F. KUNZ, President of the American Scenic and Historic Preserva- 
tion Society 

Address by E. F. JOHNSON, President of the United Swedish Societies of New 

Singing by the AMERICAN UNION OF SWEDISH SINGERS: "Banner Song" 

5:16-6:30. At the New York Zoological Park 

Examination of the Collections with special reference to Animals known to 


In charge of W. T. HORNADAY, C. W. BEEBE, R. L. DITMARS, W. REID 


8:00. At the Museum of the Brooklyn Institute, Eastern Parkway 
Opening address by F. A. LUCAS 
Address by E. L. MORRIS on the "Life of Linnaeus" 
Musical number by the Glee Club of the UNITED SWEDISH SOCIETIES 
Address by F. A. LUCAS on "Linnaeus and American Natural History" 
Musical numbers by the Glee Club of the UNITED SWEDISH SOCIETIES 
Exhibition by means of lantern slides of " Plants and Animals known to Lin- 
naeus." In charge of Dr. A. J. GROUT, F. A. LUCAS 

8:30-10:30. At the New York Aquarium, Battery Park 

(Admittance by invitation only) 
Reception given by the New York Zoological Society to the New York Academy 

of Sciences and Guests 
Demonstrations of features of Marine Life known to Linnaeus 

Commemoration of the centennial of the Aquarium building 
First view of the collections of the Aquarium by night. Music 




American Museum Natural History 


The carrying out of the plans of the Committee was made possible 
through a special fund of about $1000, the subscribers to which were 

Adams, Edward D. 

Adler, I. 

Amend, B. G. 

Armstrong, S. T. 

Atkins, George F. 

Avery, Samuel P. 

Barron, George D. 

Baskerville, Charles 

Beck, F. C. T. 

Beckhard, Martin 

Berthoud, Edward S. 

Beuren, F. T. van 

Bird, Henry 

Bristol, John I. D. 

Brown, Edwin H. 

Bumpus, H. C. 

Bunting, Martha 

Burgess, E. S. 

Call, A. Ellsworth 

Cassabeer, H. A., Jr. 

Chamberlain, Leander T. 

Chandler, C. F. 

Chubb, S. H. 

Cline, Miss May 

Cohn, J. M. 

Corning, C. R. 

Cox, C. F. 

Davenport, Mrs. Elizabeth B. 

Davidson, Miss Mary E. S. 

Da vies, J. Clarence 

Dean, Bashford 

Demorest, W. C. 

Dodge, C. H. 

Donald, James M. 

Douglas, James 

Draper, Mrs. Henry 

Dunham, E. K. 

Dwight, Jonathan, Jr. 

Dwight, Melatiah E. 

Foot, Miss Katharine 

Ford, James B. 

Frissell, A. S. 

Gooch, F. C. 

Greenwood, Isaac J. 

Haupt, Louis 

Herrman, Mrs. Esther 

Hess, Selmar 

Holden, E. R. 

Hooker, Miss Henrietta E. 

Hornaday, William T. 

Huntington, Archer M. 

Hussakof, L. 

Jesup, Morris K. 

Kaufman, Miss Pauline 

Kemp, James F. 

Kuntz, C. 

Kunz, George F. 

Lagerberg, J. de 

Langeloth, I. 

Langmann, G. 

Levy, Miss Daisy 

Low, Seth 

Lucas, F. A. 

Matthew, G. F. 

McKim, H. 

McMillin, Emerson 

McNeil, C. R. 

New York Academy of Sciences 

Nichols, John Treadwell 

Oettinger, P. J. 

Osborn, H. F. 

Osborn, W. C. 

Osburn, Raymond C. 

Owens, William W. 

Parsons, Mrs. Edwin 

Parsons, John E. 

Pederson, Frederick M. 

Perkins, W. H. 

Perry, C. J. 

Phipps, Henry 

Pinchot, Gifford 

Post, Abram S. 

Ramsperger, G. 

Riker, Samuel 

Robb, J. Hampton 

Robinson, Miss Winifred J. 

Rydberg, P. A. 

Seabury, George J. 

Seitz, Charles E. 

Sellew, T. G. 

Shannon, William Purdy 

Smith, Eugene 


Stetson, Francis Lynde White, I. C. 

Stolpe, Mauritz Wicke, William 

Thorburn & Co., J. M. Williams, R. S. 

Townsend, C. H. Wilson, Edward B. 

Tuckerman, Alfred Wood, Miss Cynthia A. 

Watson, J. H. Woodward, Robert S. 
Yatsu, Naohid6 

The Academy also acknowledges the co-operation of the American 
Museum of Natural History, the New York Botanical Garden, the New 
York Zoological Society, the Museum of the Brooklyn Institute of Arts and 
Sciences, the American Union of Swedish Singers and the Glee Club of the 
United Swedish Societies, in making the celebration dignified and successful. 

After the inspection of the special exhibits in the American Museum, the 
literary exercises began with the reception by President Britton of the official 
delegates of societies as follows, each presenting the greeting of his society. 

Royal Swedish Horticultural Society J. de Lagerberg 

Society of Friends of Natural Sciences, Ekaterinburg, 

Russia George F. Kunz 

r J. J. Stevenson 
Sociedad Cientifica "Antonio Alzate," Mexico -j C. T. Stevens 

U. F.Kemp 

Boston Society of Natural History J. A. Allen 

Museum of Comparative Zoology William Brewster 

Natural History Society of West Newbury, Mass William Merrill 

American Journal of Science Herbert E. Gregory 

Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences Alexander W. Evans 

Linnaean Society of New York Jonathan D wight, Jr. 

New York Botanical Garden Addison Brown 

New York Zoological Society H. F. Osborn 

American Museum of Natural History G. H. Sherwood 

Torrey Botanical Club H. H. Rusby 

New York Entomological Society E. B. South wick 

New York Microscopical Society J. L. Zabriskie 

New York Historical Society Samuel V. Hoffman 

American Institute of the City of New York Robert Rutter 

Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences T. G. Smith 

Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences { A - J - Grout 

1 F. A. Lucas 

Staten Island Association of Arts and Sciences Arthur Hollick 

Maryland Academy of Sciences C. C. Plitt 

American Philosophical Society J. W. Harshberger 

American Entomological Society J. W. Harshberger 

National Academy of Sciences H. F. Osborn 

Biological Society of Washington Edward L. Morris 


Ohio Academy of Sciences Raymond C. Osborn 

Indiana Academy of Sciences Guy West Wilson 

E. J. H. Amy 
E. M. Rogers 

Colorado Scientific Society 

Telegraphic greetings were read from 

B. B. Lawrence 
E. E. Olcott 
W. S. Morse 

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm 

The Royal University, Upsala 

The Royal Botanic Gardens, Edinburgh 

The Royal Dublin Society, Dublin 

The Gothenburg Society of Science, Gothenburg 

The Imperial Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg 

The Uralian Natural History Society, Ekaterinburg 

The Royal Linnaean Academy, Rome 

The Botanical Garden, Rio de Janeiro 

After the reading of these greetings, the Secretary submitted the fol- 
lowing complete list of the societies, other organizations and individuals 
sending greetings. 

Foreign Societies 

The Linnsean Society, London 

The British Association for the Advancement of Science, London 
The Society of Arts, London 

The Royal Cornwall Polytechnic Society, Fahnouth 
The Cambridge Philosophical Society, Cambridge 

The North of England Institute of Mining and Mechanical Engineers, Newcastle- 

The Royal Scottish Geographical Society, Edinburgh 

The Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh 

The Royal Philosophical Society of Glasgow, Glasgow 

The Royal Dublin Society, Dublin 

Den Norske Gradmaalingskommission, Kristiania 

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm 

The Royal Swedish Horticultural Society, Stockholm (Delegate) 

The Gothenburg Society of Sciences, Gothenburg 

The Royal University of Upsala, Upsala 

The University of Lund, Lund 

The Geological Commission of Finland, Helsingfors 

The Imperial Academy of Science, St. Petersburg 

The Uralian Natural History Society, Ekaterinburg (Delegate) 

Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen te Amsterdam, Amsterdam 

Senaat der Rijks Universiteit te Leiden, Leiden 

Koniglich Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin 

Berliner Entomologische Verein, Berlin 


Kommission zur wissenschafflichen Untersuchung der deutschen Meere, Kiel 

Kaiserliche Leopoldinisch-Carolinische deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher, 
Halle, A.S. 

Verein fiir vaterlandische Naturkunde in Wiirttemberg, Stuttgart 

Thurgauische Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Frauenfeld 

Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wieii 

Regia Societas Scientiarum Bohemica, Prague 

The Royal Hungarian Society of Natural Sciences, Budapest 

The Transylvanian Museum Society, Kolszvar 

La Socie'te' de Physique et d'Histoire Naturelle de Geneve, Suisse 

L 'Akademie de Me"decine, Paris 

Soci6te Linnee"nne de Normandie, Caen 

Socie'te' des Amis des Sciences de Rouen, Rouen 

Socie'te G6ologique du Nord, Lille 

University de Lyon, Lyons 

La Socie'tS des Sciences de Nancy, Nancy 

Socie'te' d'Histoire Naturelle de Toulouse, Toulouse 

Real Academia de Ciencias Exactas, Fisicas y Naturales, Madrid 

Specula Vaticana, Rome 

The Royal Linnaean Academy, Rome 

The Australian Museum, Sydney 

Koninklijke Natuur Kundige Vereeniging in " Nederlandsch-Indie," Weltevreden 

Royal Society of Canada, Ottawa 

Ottawa Field Naturalists' Club, Ottawa 

Entomological Society of Ontario, Toronto 

Sociedad Cientifica "Antonio Alzate," Mexic* 

The Botanical Garden, Rio de Janeiro 

Museu Nacional do Rio de Janeiro 

Honorary Members 

Sir Archibald Geikie, London Professor Charles Barrois, Lille 

Sir James Dewar, London Prof. Dr. F. Leydig, Rothenburg 

Dr. Hans Reusch, Kristiania Professor Edward S. Dana, New Haven 

Professor Hugo de Vries, Amsterdam Dr. H. R. Storer, Newport 

Professor A. A. W. Hubrecht, Utrecht Professor A. E. Brown 

Prof. Dr. Karl von den Steinen, Berlin Professor George Macloskie, Princeton 

Prof. Dr. Wilhelm Pfeffer, Leipzig Professor Edward L. Berthoud, Boulder, 

Prof. Dr. H. Rosenbusch, Heidelberg Colorado 

Domestic Societies 

Portland Society of Natural History, Portland, Me. 
Natural History Club of West Newbury, West Newbury, Mass. 
Boston Society of Natural History, Boston, Mass. (Delegate) 
Boston Scientific Society, Boston, Mass. (Delegate) 
Massachusetts Horticultural Society, Boston, Mass. 


Museum of Comparative Zoology, Cambridge, Mass. (Delegate) 
Newport Natural History Society, Newport, R.I. 
American Journal of Science, New Haven, Conn. (Delegate) 
Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, New Haven, Conn. (Delegate) 
New York State Museum, Albany, N.Y. 
Linnsean Society of New York, New York, N.Y. (Delegate) 
New York Botanical Garden, New York, N.Y. (Delegate) 
Torrey Botanical Club, New York, N.Y. (Delegate) 
New York Entomological Society, New York, N.Y. (Delegate) 
New York Microscopical Society, New York, N.Y. (Delegate) 
New York Historical Society, New York, N.Y. (Delegate) 
New York Zoological Society, New York, N.Y. (Delegate) 
American Museum of Natural History, New York, N.Y. (Delegate) 
New York Academy of Sciences, New York, N.Y. (Delegate) 
American Scenic and Historic Preservation Society. New York, N.Y. (Delegate) 
American Institute of the City of New York, New York, N.Y. (Delegate) 
Medico Legal Society of New York, New York, N.Y. (Delegate) 
United Swedish Societies of New York, New York, N.Y. (Delegate) 
Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences, New York, N.Y. (Delegate) 
Staten Island Association of Arts and Sciences, New Brighton, N.Y. (Delegate) 
New York State Education Department, Science Division, Albany, N.Y. (Dele- 

Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences, Buffalo, N.Y. (Delegate) 

Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, N.J. 

Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pa. (Delegate) 

American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia, Pa. (Delegate) 

American Entomological Society, Philadelphia, Pa. (Delegate) 

Zoological Society of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pa. (Delegate) 

Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, Pa. (Delegate) 

Natural History Society of Delaware, Wilmington, Del. 

Maryland Scientific Society, Baltimore, Md. (Delegate) 

National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C. (Delegate) 

Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. (Delegate) 

Biological Society of Washington, Washington, D.C. (Delegate) 

Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. (Delegate) 

Philosophical Society of Washington, Washington, D.C. (Delegate) 

Ohio Academy of Science, Gambier, O. (Delegate) 

Indiana Academy of Sciences, Bloomington, Ind. (Delegate) 

Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters, Madison, Wis. 

St. Paul Academy of Science, St. Paul, Minn. 

Academy of Science of St. Louis, St. Louis, Mo. 

Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, Mo. 

Colorado Scientific Society, Denver, Col. (Delegate) 

The audience then listened to the following address. 


By J. A. ALLEN, PH. D. 

Carolus Linnaeus, later known as Carl von Linn6, was bora at Ra- 
shult, in the province of Smaland, Sweden, May 13, O.S., 1707, and died 
at Hammerby, near Upsala, on Jan. 10, 1778. His grandfather was a 
farmer; his father, a clergyman. Young Linnseus, the future naturalist, 
was intended by his parents for the ministry, and his early education 
was conducted with this end in view. At the age of ten he was sent to the 
Latin School at Wexio, but after seven years at this school he was found to 
be so deficient in his scholastic studies that his parents thought of apprenti- 
cing him to a shoemaker. 

While at Wexio, much of his time was devoted to the study of plants and 
insects, an inclination apparently favored by his master, who was himself 
greatly interested in botany. Fortunately young Linnseus was rescued 
from his threatened degradation by Dr. John Rothman, a physician of 
Wexio, who recognized his superior abilities, and appreciated his interest in 
natural history. He took him into his own home, where for a year Linnseus 
continued his botanical studies, aided by the advice and library of his patron. 
At the age of twenty he entered the University of Lund, where he soon found 
himself without means of support, through the death of his patron and friend, 
the kind-hearted physician of Wexio. Fortunately he soon won the friend- 
ship of Dr. Kilian Stobseus, the professor of botany and medicine, who 
made him a member of his family. Here he had access to books and to a 
small museum of natural history, and found much leisure for exploring the 
neighboring country and for collecting objects of natural history. At the 
end of a year he went to Upsala, where, under Rudbeck and Roberg, he 
advanced rapidly in medicine and botany. Here he won the friendship of 
the renowned Olaf Celsius, whom he later characterized as the best botanist 
in Sweden, and of Artedi, a fellow-student, who afterwards became the 
founder of ichthyology. During his whole course at Upsala, it is said that 
he did not hear a single public lecture on either anatomy, botany or chem- 
istry, but he and Artedi, in good-tempered rivalry, were devoting their ener- 
gies to natural history, Linnseus to plants, birds and insects, and Artedi to 
amphibia and fishes. Linnaeus here also began the preparation of his 
epoch-making works on botany and of the first edition of his " Systema 
Natures," published a few years later in Holland. 

In 1732, at the age of twenty-five years, he was commissioned by the 
Upsala Academy of Sciences to make a tour of exploration in Lapland in the 


interest of natural history. He left Upsala on the 12th of May, and after 
an absence of five months returned to Upsala on the 10th of October. 
This remarkable journey of 4600 miles was made partly on horseback, 
partly by boat, and partly on foot; it extended northwestward across the 
Norwegian Alps to the coast of Norway beyond the Arctic Circle; the 
return journey was made by way of eastern Finland It was an undertaking 
of great hardship and much danger, being performed alone, aided only by 
local guides employed to conduct the way from one point to another. On 
his return a report of his journey was presented to the Academy, but it 
remained in manuscript until translated and published in English by Dr. 
James Edward Smith, the first president of the Linnsean Society of Ixmdon, 
in 181 1. 1 The botanical results, however, were published separately by 
Linnaeus himself, in 1737. 

The following year was spent at Upsala, where he attempted to eke out 
his scanty means of support by giving lectures on botany, mineralogy and 
chemistry. This proved contrary to one of the statutes of the university, 
to the effect that no one should give public lectures who had not obtained 
his doctor's degree, which statute was invoked against him by Rosen, the 
successor to Rudbeck in the professorship of medicine and anatomy, who 
was jealous of Linnseus's abilities and attainments. Deprived of this 
financial resource, he took some of his pupils on excursions into the neighbor- 
ing mountains, where he met the governor of the province of Dalecarlia, 
who sent him to explore and report on certain copper mines in which he was 
interested. While on this journey he gave lectures at Falun on mineralogy 
and assaying. Here he made the acquaintance of Dr. Morseus (a learned 
and wealthy physician of the district) and his two daughters, to one of whom 
he became betrothed; the father, however, insisted on deferring the marriage 
till Linnaeus had completed his professional studies and obtained his medical 
degree. For this purpose, in the spring of 1735, he journeyed to Lubeck 
and Hamburg, and later to Holland, where, in June, he received from 
the University of Harderwijk the degree of doctor of medicine. At 
Leyden he became acquainted with the leading men of science of that city, 
which soon led to his engagement by Dr. George Cliffort, a wealthy burgo- 
master of Amsterdam, to take charge, at a liberal salary, of his extensive 

1 The herbaria, library (about 2500 volumes), manuscripts and correspondence of Linnaeus, 
were offered by his widow and daughters, "by the advice of friends," to Sir Joseph Banks, 
"for the sum of a thousand guineas." Sir Joseph, not feeling inclined to the purchase, recom- 
mended it to the consideration of his friend, Dr. (later Sir) J. E. Smith, by whom these treas- 
ures were secured, and transferred to England (TURTON, Lije and Writings of Linnaeus, 1806, 
p. [39]), and later passed into the possession of the Linnaean Society of London, founded in 
1788 through the efforts of Dr. Smith, who was its first president. (See JAROINE'S Natural- 
ist's Library, Vol. I, 1833, p. 58.) 


museum and botanic garden. Later he was sent by him to England to 
secure rare plants for his garden, with a letter of introduction from the great 
Boerhaave to Sir Hans Sloane. He thus came in contact with the botanists 
of London, where, however, his reception was not always cordial. 

On his return to Holland he was offered the position of government 
physician to the Dutch colony in Surinam, which he prudently declined, 
and became an assistant to his friend Van Royen at the botanic garden in 
Leyden. After a brief visit to Paris he returned to Stockholm in September, 
1738, where he determined to settle as a physician. Notwithstanding his 
fame abroad and his skill as a botanist, the pecuniary returns from his 
profession were at first small, but they gradually increased; and, obtaining 
some government patronage, his marriage to Miss Morseus was celebrated 
on June 26, 1739. 

He remained only three years in Stockholm, during which period he 
helped to found the Royal Academy of Sciences of that city, and served as 
its first president. In 1741, under an order from the government, he made 
a journey through Oland and Gothland. In the same year he was called 
to the chair of botany at the University of Upsala, a position to which he 
had long aspired, and which he filled for thirty years, when impaired health 
compelled him to resign his official duties and to discontinue his literary 
labors. The University of Upsala, through the fame of Linnaeus, became 
widely renowned as a seat of learning, and attracted students from various 
parts of Europe. During these years of almost uninterrupted activity, most 
of LinnasuVs numerous botanical and other works were published, the 
material for which reached him in ever-increasing abundance, not only from 
distant parts of Europe, but from Siberia, China, India, Egypt, South Africa 
and North and South America. 

Academic honors were showered upon him by all the learned societies of 
Europe; a gold medal was struck in his honor by the nobles of Sweden; 
and in 1757 he was created by King Frederic a Knight of the Polar Star, and 
admitted to hereditary nobility. Foreign courts made overtures for his 
presence, and his own country neglected no opportunity to do him honor. 
His death in 1778, after six years of invalidism resulting from an attack of 
apoplexy, was recognized as a national calamity; the University of Upsala 
went into mourning, and the King ordered a medal to be struck in his 

Although cramped by poverty during the earlier part of his career, pros- 
perity did not long withhold her smile. Not only were the nobles of his 
country his patrons, but he was an especial favorite of both King Frederic 
and his queen. Through various emoluments showered upon him, he was 
able, later in life, to purchase a large estate and to construct for himself a 


museum, wherein he gathered the largest collection of botanical treasures 
that at that time had anywhere been brought together. He was happy in 
his domestic relations, and lived to see his son succeed to his chair at the 
University of Upsala. 

Although Linnseus's publications relate mainly to botany and medicine, 
they cover the whole realm of natural history. His earliest contribution to 
science is generally considered to be his " Florula Lapponica," the first part 
of which appeared in the Transactions of the Swedish Academy in 1732. 1 
This was followed by the first edition of his " Systema Naturae," published 
in Leyden in 1735. The " Fundamenta Botanica " followed in 1736, and 
was later enlarged and republished as the " Philosophia Botanica," in 1751. 
During the next ten years various other botanical publications appeared in 
rapid succession. His " Fauna Suecica," published in 1746, was his first 
special work relating to zoology. It is also notable as being the first work 
especially devoted to the entire fauna of any country. It was republished, 
with many additions, in 1761. Other botanical and several medical works 
followed during the next seven years, including his monumental " Species 
Plantarum," published in 1753. In the same year also appeared the " Mu- 
seum Tessianum," consisting chiefly of descriptions of minerals and fossils, 
the latter mainly shells and corals, and in 1754 the "Museum Adolphi 
Friderici," relating exclusively to exotic animals. This was a folio with 
thirty-three plates, the most extensive and most elaborately illustrated of 
all of Linnaeus's works. Two important medical works appeared in 1760, 
and his third zoological work, the " Museum Ludoviciae Ulricae," in 1764, 
a thick octavo, to which was annexed the second part of the "Museum 
Adolphi Friderici." 

During these thirty years of marvelous scientific activity, Linnaeus also 
contributed many papers to the Transactions of the Upsala and Stockholm 
academies and to the "Amoenitates Academici." The latter, in ten octavo 
volumes, consist of dissertations or academical theses, mostly by his students, 
selected, edited and published by him, and thus may be regarded as of equal 
authority with his own writings. Seven of these volumes were published 
during his lifetime, and contain a number of his own minor papers. 

This brief outline of Linnseus's life, his opportunities, and the published 
results of his scientific labors, affords the basis for the consideration of 
Linnaeus as a zoologist. As has been shown, he was primarily a botanist; 
he was also a mineralogist, an entomologist and a conchologist, but only 
incidentally a vertebrate zoologist. In this field his interest was less strong, 
his opportunities for research the most restricted. His zoological writings, 

1 His Hortus Uplandicus is said to have appeared one year earlier. See List of the Works 
of Limueus, in Jardine's Naturalist's Library, Vol. I, 1833, p. xvii, footnote. 


exclusive of a few minor papers, are comprised in the "Fauna Suecica," the 
"Museum Adolphi Friderici," the " Museum Ludovicise Ulricae " and the 
several editions of his " Systema Naturae." The first edition, appearing in 
1735, was a folio of only 12 pages, consisting merely of a conspectus of his 
Systema in tabular form. The second edition, published in 1740, was 
an octavo of 40 pages, in which were added, for the animal kingdom, the 
characters of the groups. The sixth, published in 1748, was greatly en- 
larged, the zoological part alone consisting of 76 pages, illustrated with six 
plates, or one for each of his six classes of animals. The tenth, published 
in 1758, was in two octavo volumes, of which the zoology formed the first 
volume, consisting of 824 pages. The twelfth, and the last edition revised 
by the author, was issued in three volumes, the first of which, containing 
the zoology and comprising 1427 pages, appeared in 1766. Thus in 
thirty-three years this work grew from a brochure of 12 pages to a work 
of 2400 pages. 

The first edition of the Systema was published when the author was 
only twenty-eight years old, during his sojourn in Holland. He had never 
previously been beyond the confines of southern Sweden, except on his 
journey to Lapland and Finland in 1732, and he had had access to no large 
collection of animals. Thus his resources for such an important undertak- 
ing were extremely limited, being restricted to his own considerable first- 
hand knowledge of the fauna of Sweden, to the few specimens of exotic 
animals he had been able to see in Lund, Upsala and Stockholm, and to the 
scanty literature of the subject there available. When the second edition 
appeared, in 1740, he had spent less than three years and a half in foreign 
countries, mainly in Holland with single brief visits to London and Paris; 
but his interests on these occasions were botanical and not zoological. 

The sixth edition (the third revised by the author), published in 1748, 
was in effect a synopsis of the fauna of Sweden, filled in, as regards the fauna 
of the rest of the world, by compilations from his predecessors. Strange as 
it may seem, outside of the tropical genera Simia, Bradypus, Dasypus, 
Myrmecophaga and Manis, this edition enumerates only thirteen species of 
mammals not found in Sweden. Only 140 are recorded for his whole class 
Animalium quadrupedium, one-third of which are Scandinavian. 

This analysis could be extended to other classes with practically similar 
results. The class Insecta, for example, includes only thirteen species that 
are not also recorded in the "Fauna Suecica," showing how limited was his 
knowledge of the world's fauna at 1748. 

The tenth edition (the fourth revised by the author), published in 1758, 
is the epoch-making work in the history of zoology, as in this the binomial 
system of nomenclature for the whole animal kingdom is introduced for the 


first time. The work is also greatly enlarged, and the classification greatly 
improved, especially that of the mammals, which class is now for the first 
time aptlv designated Mammalia. The ordinal term Primates is substituted 
for Anthropomorpha of the sixth and previous edition, the sloths (genus 
Bradypus) are removed from it, the genus Lemur is added as a new genus, 
and the bats are transferred to it from the Ferae. A new order, Bruta, is 
made up of his former third order Agrise (now suppressed) and of such other 
extremely heterogeneous elements as the elephant, the manatee, sloths, 
ant-eaters and the scaly ant-eaters. The order Ferae consists of six properly 
associated genera; the armadillos, insectivores and bats, formerly included 
in it, being removed elsewhere. His fourth order, Bestiae, is a new group, 
composed of the pigs, armadillos, opossums and insectivores. The fifth 
order, Glires, is a natural group, except for the inclusion of the genus Rhino- 
ceros, now most strangely placed with the squirrels and mice. His sixth 
order, Pecora, is retained as in the previous editions, and is also a natural 
group. The seventh, Belluae, is a new ordinal group, consisting of the 
genera Equus and Hippopotamus, transferred from the here disrupted order 
Jumenta of previous editions. The Cete, now removed by him from the 
fishes, form his eighth and last order. This reconstruction of the ordinal 
groups is a great improvement: five new genera are added, two old ones 
eliminated, and the number of species is increased from 140 to 185. In 
some of the other classes there are similar radical changes, but there is not 
time to refer to them. 

The twelfth, and the last edition revised by the author, published in 1766, 
shows many improvements over the tenth. It is greatly increased in bulk 
through the addition of many new genera and a large number of new species. 
The classification is also judiciously modified at many points. Taking 
again the class of mammals for illustration, the number of orders is reduced 
from eight to seven, through the suppression of the grossly unnatural order 
Bestiae and the transference of its genera to other associations, with, however, 
the retrograde change of placing the insectivores and the genus Didelphis 
among the Ferae. The Glires is modified by the removal of the genus 
Rhinoceros to the order Belluae and the addition to it of Noctilio, a genus 
of bats. The order Bruta is the same incongruous association of elephants, 
manatees, sloths and ant-eaters as in the tenth edition. 

The orders of mammals as now left correspond in several instances 
very nearly with those of our modern systems, notably the Primates, Glires, 
Pecora and Cete. The Ferae of the tenth edition corresponds to the modern 
Carnivora, but in the twelfth he made the mistake of putting back into it 
the marsupials and the insectivores. His order Belluae being essentially 
the modern suborder Perissodactyla, his order Bmta is the only grossly 
incongruous association of types. 


The only previous classification of mammals with which Linnaeus's 
need to be compared is Ray's, published in 1693, whose system, taken as a 
whole, is far more artificial than Linnaeus's. Naturally there are some 
striking coincidences of grouping, and in the characters employed by the 
two authors. As to the latter, Ray so well covered the field that there was 
little left for Linnaeus to add, since during the interval between Ray and 
Linnaeus not much was learned about the anatomy and relations of the 
ordinal groups of mammals. Doubtless Linnaeus was influenced, in his 
removal of the cetaceans from the fish to the mammal class, by the systems 
of his contemporaries, Klein (1751) and Brisson (1756), in which respect 
only are their systems better or less artificial than his. Inasmuch, however, 
as Brisson divided mammals into eighteen orders instead of seven, he 
escaped some of the grotesque combinations made by Linnaeus: on the 
other hand, he gave undue emphasis to relatively unimportant differences. 

Linnseus's classification of birds is closely modeled upon that of Ray, 
and his departures from it are seldom improvements. His lack of knowledge 
of ornithology is strikingly apparent through his repeated association of 
very unlike species in the same genus, as where a penguin is combined with 
a tropic bird to form his genus Phaetkon, and another species of penguin 
with an albatross to form his genus Diomedea. In the tenth edition he 
recorded only about 550 species of birds; in the twelfth, this number was 
raised to nearly a thousand, mainly on the basis of Brisson's great work, 
which appeared in 1760. The greater part were based on the writings of 
previous authors ; probably less than one-fourth of them being known to him 
from specimens. 

His class Amphibia contained four orders, of which the fourth consisted 
of cartilaginous and other wholly unrelated fishes, and shows how slight 
was his acquaintance with the lower classes of vertebrates. His first order, 
Reptilia, includes such diverse animals as turtles, lizards, salamanders, 
frogs and toads. The snakes formed his second order, Serpentes. 

His arrangement of the fishes was originally based on that of Artedi, 
whose " Ichthyologia " Linnaeus published while sojourning in Holland, in 
1738, after Artedi's untimely death by accidental drowning. 

His class Insecta is nearly equivalent to the modern subphylum Arthro- 
poda, as it includes the Arachnida and the Crustacea. 

His class Vermes was the waste-basket of his system, including all the 
forms of animal life that were neither vertebrates nor insects, which he dis- 
tributed into five orders, some of them as heterogeneous in character as the 
class itself. The second order, Mollusca, comprised all sorts of soft-bodied 
animals, mostly marine, as slugs, sea-anemones, ascidians, holothurians, 
cuttle-fishes, star-fishes, sea-urchins and jelly-fishes. The animals now com- 
monly known as Mollusca formed his third order, Testacea. 


It is not, however, just to judge Linnaeus's work by the standards of 
to-day. The above comparison of the zoological part of the " Systema 
Naturae" with our present knowledge of animals is not to be taken as a 
disparagement: we merely note the progress of zoology during the last 
century and a half of the world's history. Linnaeus was a born systematist ; 
his energy and industry were enormous; his isolation promoted independence 
and originality. He devised new classifications, and thoroughly systema- 
tized not only the knowledge of his predecessors, but the vast increment 
he himself added. He inspired his students with his own enthusiasm, 
taught them his own advanced methods, and influenced a goodly number 
of them to undertake natural history explorations in distant and zoologically 
unknown parts of the world. 

In special lines of research he was far behind several of his contempo- 
raries, notably Brisson, in respect to both mammals and birds. But he 
nearly doubled the number of known forms of reptiles, amphibians and 
fishes, and increased many fold the number of species of Ccelenterates, on 
the basis of wholly new material gathered through his own efforts. 

Disgusted with the needlessly detailed accounts and repetitions that 
characterized the writings of most of his predecessors, he unfortunately 
adopted the extreme of condensation, thereby adding greatly to the diffi- 
culties of his successors in determining to just what forms the thousands of 
new names he introduced really belonged. Many of his species, based on 
the accounts given by previous authors, were also composite, often con- 
taining very diverse elements. But this detracts little from his credit. As 
one of his appreciative biographers has tersely put it, "He found biology a 
chaos; he left it a cosmos." 

Linnaeus's beneficent influence upon biology was hardly less as a nomen- 
clator than as a taxonomist. He not only invented a descriptive terminology 
for animals and plants, but devised a system of nomenclature at once simple 
and efficient, and which for a hundred and fifty years has been accepted 
without essential modification. 

Linnaeus divided the three kingdoms of nature into classes, the classes 
into orders, the orders into genera, the genera into species, under which 
latter he sometimes recognized varieties. Of these groups, as he understood 
them, he gave clear definitions, but they were in most cases much more 
comprehensive than the limits now assigned to groups of corresponding 
rank. His genera correspond in some cases to groups now termed orders, 
and frequently to the modern idea of family; in some cases they contained 
species now placed in separate orders. Prior to Linnaeus, these groups had 
less definite significance, and were often designated by a phrase instead 
of a single word. Species were indicated only by a cumbersome diagnosis 


intended to express their chief distinctive characters. For this, Linnaeus 
substituted a single word, an innovation the merits of which were at once 
almost universally recognized. But Linnaeus reached this solution of a 
grave inconvenience somewhat slowly, and not till 1753 did he fully adopt 
the nomen triviale, when he introduced it into botany in his " Species Plan- 
tarum," which is taken by botanists as the point of departure for the bino- 
mial system. In the following year, 1754, he introduced it into zoology, 
using it throughout his "Museum Adolphi Friderici" for all the animals 
catalogued or described in this superb work; namely, 39 species of mammals, 
23 of birds, 90 of reptiles and amphibians, 91 of fishes and 64 of invertebrates, 
or for an aggregate of 307 species of animals. Four years later, in the 
tenth or 1758 edition of his " Systema Naturae," he adopted it for the whole 
animal kingdom, which date is now generally taken as the beginning of the 
binomial system for zoology. The importance and utility of this simple 
innovation in a matter of nomenclature are beyond estimate, and if Linnaeus 
had done nothing else for the advancement of biology, he would be entitled 
to a conspicuous niche in the temple of fame and to the gratitude of all sub- 
sequent workers in this field. He for the first time gave technical standing 
to the systematic names, both generic and specific, of all the plants and ani- 
mals known at the dates when he introduced the nomen triviale into the 
nomenclature of botany and zoology. 

It is of interest in this connection to note the number of species of animals 
known to Linnaeus at the date of publication of the last edition of the " Sys- 
tema Naturae," the number known to him personally, and the number 
recorded respectively from North America and from South America. 

Of mammals, the whole number of species recorded is 190, of which three- 
fourths are based on the descriptions of previous authors. Only 48 were 
American, 12 from North America and 36 from South America. The 
5 North American mammals known to Linnaeus from specimens were the 
raccoon, star-nosed mole, common mole, flying squirrel and chipmunk. 
The number of species at present known from North America is 600, ex- 
cluding subspecies. The number for the world, including the extinct as 
well as the living, is about 10,000 as against less than 200 recorded by 

Of birds, about 925 are recorded of the 15,000 known to-day. The 200 
known from America are divided about equally between North America and 
South America, only 50 of which were described from specimens. 

The amphibia and reptiles number collectively about 250, of which about 
one-third are American, 40 per cent of the latter being North American 
and 60 per cent South American. The North American include 3 sala- 
manders, the box-turtle, the six-lined lizard, the blue-tailed lizard and 14 


snakes. The greater part of the 20 North American species of reptiles and 
amphibians known to him personally were based on specimens transmitted 
by his former student, Dr. C. D. Garden, from the Carolinas, and on a few 
sent from Pennsylvania by Pehr Kalm, also one of his students. Thus the 
greater part of the snakes of the eastern United States became known to 
Linnaeus prior to 1766. 

About 500 species of fishes are recorded, of which 100 are American, 
divided about equally between North and South America. Forty of the 
nearly 60 North American species described are based on specimens sent 
from the Carolinas by Dr. Garden, the others mainly on specimens in the 
museum of King Frederic. 

There is not time to notice in detail the various classes of Crelenterates. 
A few words about insects will serve as a general illustration for this phylum. 
Linnaeus recorded about 2400 species, the greater part of which he was the 
first to describe; about 300,000 are now recognized. Of the insects 
know r n to him, 65 per cent are recorded in the second (1761) edition of his 
" Fauna Sueccia," and many of the remainder are European, so that his 
knowledge of exotic species was exceedingly restricted. Of Coleoptera he 
recorded about 800 species; the number now known is estimated at 12,000. 
Of Lepidoptera he recorded about 800; 7000 are now known from North 
America alone. Of Diptera he recorded 278 species, of which 200 were 
from Sweden; 12,000 are now known from North America. 

Linnaeus's system of classification was based on a few external characters, 
and was recognized by himself as artificial and provisional. It was intended 
only as a stepping-stone to better things, when the structure and affinities 
of animals should become better known. The statistics already given in- 
dicate how limited was his knowledge of the world's fauna; his classifica- 
tion of animals shows how little he knew of their structure, and how often he 
was misled by superficial resemblances. Yet his "Systema Naturae" was the 
working basis of all naturalists for the next half-century. 1 Twelve editions 
were published during his lifetime, and it was later translated into several 
of the continental languages. To such an extent was it regarded as final by 
many subsequent naturalists that, when his groups began to be changed and 
new genera interpolated, it was deemed by some of them little less than sacri- 
lege. When convenience demanded subdivision of the larger genera, owing 
to the great number of new species that had become known since 1766, it 

1 Turton, in his Life and Writings of Linne", says, "To this system may be justly applied 
the nervous observations of Dr. Johnson, in his delineation of the character of Shakespeare: 
'The stream of time, which is continually washing away the dissoluble fabrics of other 
systems, passes without injury by the adamant of Linne".'" WILLIAM TURTON: A General 
Syntem oj Nature.. . by Sir Charles Linne, Vol. VII, 1806, p. [42]. 


was quite common to consider the new groups as sections, and to give them 
merely vernacular names, or, if their authors were bold enough to designate 
them by Latin names, they were commonly called subgenera. 

It was not till near the close of the eighteenth century that there arose a 
new class of naturalists, the anatomical school, led by the elder Geoffrey 
and G. Cuvier, who studied the internal structure of animals as well as their 
external parts. It was, however, many years before the new systems began 
to displace or greatly to modify the long-accepted and strongly intrenched 
Linnsean methods of grouping animals. 

The great advance in biologic knowledge since the time of Linnaeus can- 
not be easily measured; it can be suggested by noting the fact that compara- 
tive anatomy, embryology, histology, paleontology, evolutionism and many 
kindred lines of research, have nearly all had their origin or principal develop- 
ment within the last century, all converging for the solution of the genetic 
relationships of animals and the origin of life. Linnaeus, in an oration deliv- 
ered in 1743, 1 held that each species of animal originated from a single pair, 
citing as incontrovertible proof the Mosaic account of the creation. It is 
indeed a long look back to the middle of the eighteenth century, when his 
labors marked a new era in the history of biology. In commemorating to-day 
the two hundredth anniversary of his birth, we honor ourselves by showing 
our esteem for the greatest naturalist of the eighteenth century. 

i In his oration De telluris habitabilis incremento, delivered and first published in 1743 
and republished in 1744, and again in the second volume of the Amcenitates Academicse, in 
1751, he gives his reasons for believing "that at the beginning to the world there was created 
one single sexual pair of every species of living thing. 

"To the proofs of this proposition," he continues, "I request those who are my auditors to 
lend a favorable ear and willing attention. 

"Our holy Faith instructs us to believe that the Divinity created a single pair of the human 
kind, one individual male, the other female. The sacred writing of Moses acquaint us that they 
were placed in the Garden of Eden, and that Adam there gave names to every species of animal, 
God causing them to appear before him. 

" By a sexual pair I mean one male and one female in every species where the individuals 
differ in sex." J. F. BRAND'S translation, in Select Dissertations from the Amcenitates Aca- 
demicoe, 1781, pp. 75, 76. 


The following address was prepared for the celebration, but was read 
only by title. It is inserted here on account of its close relations with the 
address of Dr. Allen. 





By W. K. GREGORY, M. A. 

In connection with the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of Carl 
von Linne, or Carolus Linnaeus, it may not be inappropriate to consider 
him in his capacity of bridging over the gap between ancient and medieval 
zoology on the one hand and modern zoology on the other, and further to 
glance at the principles and facts upon which he based his two great con- 
tributions to the broader knowledge of the class of which man is the domi- 
nating member. For this purpose the history of zoology may be divided, 
in a general way, into seven epochs: the Aristotelian, the Scholastic, the 
Renaissance, the Raian, the Linnsean, the Cuvierian, and the Darwinian. 
There are also two axioms which it will be well to bear in mind. The 
first is, that Linnseus became a point of departure in the history of modern 
biology, only because he was in turn the product of the intersection of many 
important historical series which ramify and intertwine indefinitely, and 
stretch back into the remote past of every aspect of life. The second axiom 
is, that every new idea, or, for that matter, every new event, is the fertile 
hybrid resulting from the fortuitous crossing of several specifically distinct 
old ideas or events. 


The first epoch under consideration is that of Aristotle, of the fourth 
century B.C., and it may be characterized as the initial analytical epoch. 
Aristotle's theory of the genetic relationship of the chain of beings from 
polyp to man did not, of course, materially influence Linnseus. The idea 
of evolution was not destined to come to its fruition through Aristotle, the 
schoolmen, or even in Linnseus or Cuvier. The true relation of Aristotle 
as a systematic zoologist to Ray and Linnaeus is exhibited in the following 
well-known citations from "The Parts of Animals." 

" Some animals are viviparous, some oviparous, some vermiparous. The vivipa- 
rous are such as man and the horse, and all those animals which have hair; and of 
the aquatic animals, the whale kind, as the dolphin and cartilaginous fishes [in refer- 
ence to the viviparity of certain sharks] (Book I, Chap. V). Of quadrupeds which 
have blood and are viviparous, some are (as to their extremities) many-cloven, as the 
hands and feet of man. For some are many-toed, as the lion, the dog, the panther; 
some are bifid, and have hoofs instead of nails, as the sheep, the goat, the elephant. 


the hippopotamus; and some have undivided feet, as the solid-hoofed animals, the 
horse and ass. The swine kind share both characters [an allusion to the 'mule 
footed' swine, monstrosities in which the -median digits are fused, and terminate in a 
solid composite hoof) " (Book II, Chap. V). 

Ray and later writers probably had this passage in mind when they 
used the descriptive terms "multifido," "bifido," "solidungula," "ungulata," 
"unguiculata," fissipedes." Here, also, attention is directed to the feet as 
exhibiting characteristic differences. In another passage Aristotle says, 

" Animals have also great differences in the teeth both when compared with each 
other and with man. For all quadrupeds which have blood and are viviparous have 
teeth. And in the first place some are ambidental 1 (having teeth in both jaws); 
and some are not so, wanting the front teeth in the upper jaw. Some have neither 
front teeth nor horns, as the camel; some have tusks, 2 as the boar; some have not. 
Some have serrated teeth, 3 as the lion, the panther, the dog; some have the teeth 
unvaried, 4 as the horse and the ox; for the animals which vary their cutting teeth 
have all serrated teeth. No animal has both tusks and horns; nor has any animal 
with serrated teeth either of those weapons. The greater part have the front teeth 
cutting, and those within broad " (Book I, Chap. II). 

This passage evidently directed the attention of later writers to the 
importance of the teeth as a means of distinguishing and hence of classi- 
fying mammals, and we shall see that Ray and, later, Linnaeus were quick 
to avail themselves of the suggestion. 

Aristotle was quite unconscious of the classification that has been ascribed 
to him, as Whewell 5 shows; but "Aristotle does show, as far as could be 
done at his time, a perception of the need of groups and of names of groups 
in the study of the animal kingdom, and thus may justly be held up as the 
great figure in the prelude to the formation of systems which took place in 
more advanced scientific times." Whewell also quotes passages that show 
Aristotle's recognition of the lack of generic names to denominate natural 
groups. Aristotle says that "of the class of viviparous quadrupeds there 
are many genera, 6 but these again are without names, except specific names, 
such as man, lion, stag, horse, dog and the like. Yet there is a genus of 
animals that have manes, as the horse, the ass, the oreus, the yinnus, the 
innus and the animal which in Syria is called heminus (mule) . . . Where- 
fore," he adds (that is, because we do not possess genera and generic names 
of this kind), "we must take the species separately and study the nature of 
each." "These passages," Whewell continues, "afford us sufficient ground 

2 XawXto'Sovra. 
AvciraXXoKra. 5 Op. tit.. III., p. 350. ' E(St) 


for placing Aristotle at the head of those naturalists to whom the first views of 
the necessity of a zoological system are due" (Op. cit., p. 352). 


From the time of Aristotle and his classical successors until the rise of 
scholasticism in the eleventh century, Europe, as every one knows, was too 
much preoccupied with world-wide displacements and readjustments of 
peoples and of institutions to pay particular attention to natural science; 
and even the Scholastic Epoch in the history of philosophy and science 
was chiefly occupied with the further development and systematization of 
the great body of religious and metaphysical doctrines. So far as natural 
history is concerned, it is perhaps rather a further interregnum than an 
epoch, rather an era or lapse of uneventful time than a time of the slow 
ascension of some great illuminative idea. The anthropocentric idea domi- 
nated in natural history as the geocentric idea dominated in astronomy; 
hence a knowledge of the real or supposed properties of animals and 
particularly of plants was chiefly cultivated in connection with alchemy, 
magic and materia medica. The medieval imagination, full of mysticism, 
eager for the uncanny and fantastic and teeming with images of ubiquitous 
devils, flourished on the marvelous tales of a "Sir John Maundeville," and 
peopled the earth with the monsters which so long survived and ramped 
in the Terrse Incognita? of world maps. In the schools, citations from 
authorities were accepted in lieu of proof, and the simple zoology of Aristotle 
and the scriptures was deeply covered by the accretions of learned exegesis. 

Scholasticism reached its prime as early as the thirteenth century, in the 
system of the illustrious St. Thomas Aquinas, the "princeps scholasticorum." 
Afterward, while the renaissance movement was discovering new worlds in 
all directions, scholasticism in general (but with some brilliant exceptions) 
rapidly reached the " phylogerontic stage" of its evolution, and produced all 
sorts of bizarre specializations in terminology and in dialectics. 

It has been said of the scholastic philosophy that it "vigorously exercised 
the understanding without bringing it to any conclusions." However this 
may be, it cannot be doubted that the very excesses of scholasticism stim- 
ulated the reactive return to experience, which gave rise incidentally to 
biological science. The schoolmen furthermore perpetuated and aroused 
interest in Aristotle's analyses, and gave currency to many methods of 
analysis and description. Among these we may cite, first, the dichotomous 
method of division, which is a forerunner of modern classifications; second, 
the logical concepts of genus and species. Especially noteworthy was the 
expansion of classical Latin into a highly specialized language of philosophy 
and science. 



Biological science, and especially zoology, did not respond fully to the 
impulse of the Renaissance movement until literature, politics, astronomy 
and geographical discovery had made the most signal advances. Hence in 
Aldrovandi (1522-1605) and Gesner (1516-65) the superstitions and myths 
of the middle ages still linger, while the systematic work of future genera- 
tions is initiated in the extensive illustrated catalogues and descriptions of 
plants and animals. On the philosophical side of zoology, the Englishman 
Wotton, in his "De Differentiis Animalium" (Paris, 1552), "rejected the 
legendary and fantastic accretions [of medieval zoology] and returned to 
Aristotle and the observation of nature" (Lankester 1 ). One of the con- 
temporaries of Gesner and Wotton was the founder of anatomy, Andreas 
Vesalius (1514-64), who boldly broke with tradition, and declared that the 
source of knowledge of the human body should be, not Galen, but the 
human body itself. 

Near the end of this period, the botanist, Cesalpino (Caesalpinus) of 
Arezzo (1519-1778), a celebrated scholastic philosopher, published his volu- 
minous work "De Plantis" (1583). In this work, which was inspired by 
the new idea of direct observation, the confused arrangements of plants of 
the earlier herbalists were replaced by an orderly classification suggested 
by the brigades of an army, and founded upon the number, the position 
and the figure of the reproductive parts. He divided plants into ten great 
classes, which were again subdivided; to these assemblages he gave mono- 
mial names in substantive form. Linnaeus himself says of him, that, 
"though the first in attempting to form natural orders, he observed as 
many as the most successful later writers" (Whewell, Op. cit., pp. 282, 

A reason for this precocious development of a natural classification of 
plants may be sought in the very multiplicity of kinds and the large herbaria 
and horticultural gardens in existence, which necessitated some sort of orderly 
arrangement and which would assist the eager student to recognize related 
series. We note in contrast the delayed progress of the classification of the 
mammals due to the comparative fewness of known forms, the greater 
complexity of organization and the difficulties of observation. 


Among those who contributed the data for Linnseus's generalizations, 
no name is more important, at least in the history of vertebrate zoology, than 

1 E. Ray Lankester, The History and Scope of Zoology, in The Advancement of Science 
London, 1890, p. 293. 


that of John Ray. Accordingly, the fourth epoch under consideration may 
be termed the Raian Epoch, and culminates with the publication in 1693 
of Ray's "Synopsis Methodica Animalium Quadrupedum et Serpentini 
Generis," which is one of the great landmarks in the history of classification. 
Ray's debt to the past is shown in the facts that his lucid tabular analyses 
of the common structural features of animals are arranged dichotomously; 
that in each division and subdivision a single adjective or adjectival phrase 
indicates the most important common feature of the animals in question, 
and that these terms are, as we have seen, in many cases borrowed from 

Ray, like Linnaeus, gave more attention to plants than to animals, and 
depended upon his colleague, Willughby, for much of the data, especially 
in the fishes. Like Linnaeus also, Ray had a superb gift of order and a 
philosophical mind that made him a worthy countryman and contemporary 
of Sir Isaac Newton. 

In his tabular analysis, Ray distinctly foreshadows Linnaeus in the fol- 
lowing points : 

1. The higher vertebrates are contrasted with the fishes as breathing 
by lungs instead of gills. 

2. The whales are classed with the viviparous animals and expressly 
removed from the fishes, from which they were further distinguished by the 
horizontality of the tail-fin. This step, however, was felt to be so radical 
that Ray afterwards constructed a definition which included both whales 
and fishes. 

3. As remarked by Gill, the terrestrial or quadruped mammals are 
bracketed with the aquatic as "Vivipara," and contrasted with the "Ovi- 
para" or "Aves." "The Vivipara are exactly co-extensive with Mammalia, 
but the word ' vivipara ' was used as an adjective and not as a noun. " 1 This 
distinction seems to have been an important one, when substance was so 
carefully distinguished from attribute. Ray emphasized the common 
attributes of all the terrestrial hairy quadrupeds, of the amphibious hairy 
animals such as the seals and manati, and of the purely aquatic and fish-like 
Cetaceans; but he does not seem to have insisted that all these animals 
agreed in essence and substance as well as in attribute, so that they should 
require a new substantive name such as Linnaeus afterward applied to them. 

4. The double ventricle is noted as characteristic of both Vivipara and 

5. In order to associate the "manati" and other amphibious mammals 
with their terrestrial congeners, the term "hairy animals" is employed as 
more comprehensive than quadrupeds. 

The Story of a Word Mammal, in Popular Science Monthly, Vol. LXI. September, 1902, 
pp. 434-438. 


Ray further set the standard for Linnaeus in his concise descriptions of 
European and foreign mammals, especially those described by travelers in 
America and in the East. Ray often used the term "species" merely as 
the equivalent of the middle English "spece," which survives in our word 
spice," and meant "kind:" it was also equivalent to the logical "species" 
(cf. the Greek c*8os) of the schoolmen, and is exemplified in Ray and Wil- 
lughby's "Historia Pjscium" in such phrases as "clarias niloticus Belonii 
mustelse fluviatilis species," "bagre piscis barbati ac aculeati species." But 
Ray also used the term " species " in quite a Linnsean manner, as in the 
names Ovis laticauda, Ovis strepsiceros and Ovis domestica. In form, at least, 
this foreshadows the binomial system of nomenclature and the recognition of 
the species in general as a supposedly objective reality and the unit of classifi- 
cation. The form of Ray's specific definitions seems, however, to imply that 
the term "species" in Ray's mind was often more a "differentia," or specific 
adjective modifying the generic concept than a fully developed substantive 
name, and Ray did not apparently realize the convenience of applying the 
binomial method of nomenclature universally. Even Linnaeus at first intro- 
duced the specific, "trivial," or common name, merely as a marginal 
index or symbol of the full specific phrase. Ray recognized the considerable 
variability of species, but believed also in their separate creation and fixity. 
He frequently adverts to the internal characters of animals; and his book 
shows, that even by his time a considerable number of observations on 
the soft parts of animals had already accumulated. 


The work of Ray in botany and zoology fully prepared the way for 
Linnaeus, whose epoch may be characterized as the Legislative Epoch, be- 
cause his methods of description and classification, and especially his nomen- 
clature exerted such profound formative and regulative influence upon the 
work of his contemporaries and successors that he was called the " lawgiver 
of natural history." 

Linnceus's Broader Contributions to the Class Mammalia. 

One of the most enduring claims of Linnaeus upon the grateful memory 
of posterity arises from his felicitous coinage of the word "mammalia" 
(animals with mammae or breasts after analogy with Latin words like ani- 
mal *) as a class name for the forms characterized by Ray as " viviparous 
hairy animals." Thus not only the terrestrial hairy oviparous quadrupeds, 

i Theodore Gill, I. c. 


but also the aquatic Vivipara now called Cetaceans and Sirenians, were for 
the first time definitely included under a single class name. 

In attempting to appraise Linnaeus's contributions to the broader knowl- 
edge of the class of mammals, we must bear in mind what Dr. J. A. Allen 
has well shown, 1 namely: that Linnaeus was primarily a botanist, that his 
interest in mammals was incidental, that his opportunities for studying 
them were very limited, that his first-hand knowledge of extra-European 
mammals was practically nil, and finally that several of his ordinal group- 
ings of mammals (e. g., rhinoceros with the rodents) now appear highly 
unnatural and even ludicrous. 

On the other hand, there are certain considerations which may prevent 
us from thinking any the less of his judgment and genius on that account. 
Although Linnaeus may have known very little about extra-European 
mammals, he had, nevertheless, a fairly good conception of the essential 
features of mammals as a class, as shown by his definition in the tenth edition 
of the "Systema Naturae" (1758). Here in concise phrase he states that 
mammals have a heart with two auricles and two ventricles, with hot red 
blood; that the lungs breathe rhythmically; that the jaws are slung as in 
other vertebrates, but "covered," i. e., with flesh, as opposed to the "naked" 
jaws of birds; that the penis is intromittent ; that the females are viviparous, 
and secrete and give milk; that the means of perception are the tongue, 
nose, eyes, ears and the sense of touch; that the integument is provided 
with hairs, which are sparse in tropical and still fewer in aquatic mammals ; 
that the body is supported on four feet, save in the aquatic forms, in which 
the hind limbs are said to be coalesced into a tail (the only erroneous idea 
in the whole definition). 

Many of these characters had previously been noticed by Ray in his 
description of the hairy quadrupeds. It is not impossible, too, that Lin- 
naeus may have been assisted to the comprehension of the essential features 
of the mammals through his friendship with Bernard de Jussieu, who is 
said by Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire to have induced him to include the 
Cetaceans in the class Mammalia; and possibly he also owed something 
to the researches of Klein and Brisson. In spite of all this, Linnaeus's own 
studies in medicine, in Holland, doubtless made him familiar with the 
anatomy of at least one mammal, man; and on his journeys through the 
north of Europe he must have observed many other mammals at close range. 
Thus was Linnaeus prepared for the clear recognition and emphasis of 
another fact of far-reaching importance. It was evidently well known 
that the anatomy of the hairy quadrupeds was similar in plan, if not in detail, 

1 See pp. 9 ff. 


to that of man, and we find Descartes (for example, in his "Discourse on 
Method" Part V., 1637) advising those who wished to understand his 
theory of the action of the lungs and circulatory system, "to take the trouble 
of getting dissected in their presence the heart of some large animal pos- 
sessed of lungs, for this is throughout sufficiently like the human" (ital. mihi). 
And it was further known that of all animals the monkeys are most nearly 
like man, both externally and internally. This was asserted by Aristotle 
and other classical authors, but was fully demonstrated in a carefully pre- 
pared and illustrated work 1 on the anatomy and appearance of animals 
from the Jardin du Roi, by a committee of savants of the French Academy, 
appointed by the Grand Monarch. 

This work and these important observations may or may not have come 
under the notice of Linnaeus on the occasion of his visit to Paris in 1738. 
At any rate, he did not hesitate to follow the logical consequences of these 
facts, namely, that in a strictly zoological classification, man would be 
grouped not only in the class Mammalia, but even in the same ordinal divi- 
sion with the monkeys. Accordingly, in the tenth edition of the Systema 
the earlier name Anthropomorphse is replaced by Primates, and the genera 
Homo, Simia, Lemur and VespertiMo, are grouped under that order. The 
Primates were thus regarded as the chiefs of the hierarchy of terrestrial 
beings, and consequently, as in nearly all subsequent schemes down to the 
Darwinian Epoch, head the classified legions of creatures. Linnaeus was too 
often at fault in surmising the generic and ordinal affinities of the species of 
the lower vertebrates; but this bold allocation of man to the order Primates 
surely bears the marks of genius, and led the way to the modern generaliza- 
tion that man is knit by ties of blood kinship to the Primates, and more 
remotely to the whole organic world. 

Linnaeus' s Principles in his Classification of the Mammalia. 

The diagnostic definition given by Linnaus of the order Primates may 
be cited because it rests upon the principles and theories which guided him 
in classification and which led to his most successful groupings, as well as 
to his serious blunders. This definition is as follows: 

Inferior front teeth iv, parallel, laniariform [canine] teeth solitary [that is, in a single 

pair above and below]. 
Mammae pectoral, one pair. 
The anterior extremities are hands. 
The arms are separated by clavicles, the gait usually on all fours ("incessu tetrapodo 

They climb trees and pluck the fruits thereof. 

1 Mgmoires pour servir a 1'histoire naturelle des animaux, a la Haye, 1715 (4to, 2 vols.), 
rediges par Perrault et Dodart. 


This definition was clearly insufficient to exclude all extraneous genera 
from this really natural order; for (1) under Lemur Linnaeus included, not 
only all the then known forms now recognized as the suborder Lemuroidea, 
but also the "Flying Lemur," Galeopithecus, which properly either forms 
an order by itself with no near affinities with the Primates, or is at most a 
suborder of the Cheiroptera; (2) the definition also included " Vespertilio," 
i. e., the bats, excepting Noctilio, an order more nearly related to the Insecti- 
vores than to the Primates. 

Many of the characters selected by Linnaeus for his ordinal diagnoses 
were of the "adaptive" or superficial kind, which are now known to have 
been most easily modifiable by changes in the external or internal environ- 
ment. The reason for this mistake was, that Linnaeus regarded the mode 
of sustenance of a group as one of its most deep-seated attributes and most 
surely indicative of more or less hidden affinities with other groups. Lin- 
naeus was constantly searching for natural groups, but he did not realize 
that the natural affinity of the members of the larger groups was due to 
descent from common ancestors, just as in the case of members of the same 
species. An example of his reliance upon sustenance is seen in his defini- 
tion, in the tenth edition of the Systema, of the order Ferae, the Carnivora 
of later authors. Here "sustenance by rapine, upon carcasses ravenously 
snatched" is evidently felt to be connected with "front teeth in both jaws: 
superior vi, all acute," with "laniariform teeth [canines] solitary," with 
"claws on the feet acute." 

One of his dicta in botany was, that a character of great systematic 
importance in one group may be very variable in another; consequently he 
did not mention " sustenance " under Bruta, but contented himself with the 
two characters "front teeth none either above or below" and "gait awkward 
(incessus ineptior)." As this order included the elephant, the manatee, 
the sloth, the great ant-eater and the scaly ant-eater, it has been justly cited 
as a grossly unnatural assemblage, and the grouping accounted for by 
Linnaeus's ignorance of the animals composing it. 

Now it is possible that Linnaeus himself did not regard this assemblage 
as natural, but merely as a convenient artificial grouping. But I am more 
disposed to attribute its existence to his habit of searching for hidden affini- 
ties below the most obvious external differences, as when he placed the seals 
in the order Ferae, joined the bats with the Primates, the horse and the 
hippopotamus, the rhinoceros with the Rodents, and the pig with the Insecti- 
vores (in the order Bestise). 

Linnaeus recognized that the ordinal classification of the mammals was 
a difficult problem, as is shown by the conspicuous changes (not always 
improvements in our eyes) and redistributions which he made between the 


first and "tenth" editions of the Systema and further by the fact that Erx- 
leben, who revised and extended the Systema (1777), abandoned the ordi- 
nal divisions entirely and merely listed the genera seriatim. The difficulty 
of the problem is indicated by the fact that Cuvier, with far better material 
and more extensive knowledge, was constantly deceived by "adaptive" 
(or homoplastic) resemblances. Even Cope, who wrote much on homo- 
plastic and convergent evolution, was himself deceived by the similarities 
of structure in the marsupial "mole," Notoryctes, and the Cape golden 
mole, Chrysochloris, an undoubted insectivore. 

The most "inexcusable" blunder of Linnseus, that of placing the rhino- 
ceros with the Rodents under the order " Glires," may have been due, not 
to carelessness, but to the fact that the Indian rhinoceros has a single pair 
of close-set cutting incisors in the upper jaw, which oppose the elongate 
incisor-like appressed canines of the lower jaw and thus show a superficial 
approach to the rodent dentition. If Linnaeus had known that Hyrax, 
which Pallas described as a Rodent ("Cavia"), had cheek-teeth like those 
of Rhinoceros, he doubtless might have felicitated himself upon his supposed 

In brief, Linnaeus, as fully shown by Whewell, 1 from his profound and 
wide botanical knowledge, was acquainted with many natural orders, and 
strove constantly to recognize others. He knew that a character of great 
diagnostic and fundamental value in one order may be of slight value in 
another; he knew that even in a natural order some of the diagnostic and 
fundamental characters might be absent in certain members otherwise 
clearly allied to a given series. He knew that a natural series is "natural" 
because of the totality of its characters, that the "genus makes the character," 
and not vice versa, a hard doctrine to many of his contemporaries. When 
Linnseus had arrived at a conception of any given natural order, he selected 
certain characters as diagnostic, but not necessarily universal, and constructed 
professedly artificial or only partly natural keys to his "natural" orders. 

When Linnaeus turned his attention to the classification of animals, we 
may believe that he followed the same principles. In this application of the 
principles gained in one subject to the data of another, we have a good 
example of the felicitous union of specifically distinct ideas to produce a 
line of ideas that are new and very fertile. 

The Relation of Linnaeus to his Successors. 

Linnseus inherited from Ray and from the scholastic system the dogma 
of the separate creation and objective reality of species, which became 

* Op. Cit., pp. 319-325. 



Courtesy N.Y. Botan. Garden. W. A. Murrill, Photo. 


Courtesy N.Y. Botan. Garden. 



developed and strengthened in his hands as a result of his observations. 
His dictum was species tot sunt diversce quot diversce formce ah initio sunt 
creatcB. The resemblances between members of a single species were hence 
held to be due to descent from an original pair, and the mutual infertility 
of different species to be the natural penalty of the effort to traverse the gaps 
established from the beginning. 

This view was somewhat modified in later editions of the Systema, in 
which Linnaeus held that "all the species of one genus constituted at first 
(that is at the Creation) one species, ab initio unam constituerint speciem; 
they were subsequently multiplied by hybrid generation that is by inter- 
crossing with other species." 1 

The general relation of Linnaeus to his successors may be summarized 
in a few words. The sixth epoch in the history of zoology extends from the 
latter part of the eighteenth to the middle of the nineteenth century, and 
may be called the Anatomical Epoch, because, through the labors of Cuvier 
and his great English pupil and successor, Richard Owen, the taxonomic 
studies of the Linnsean school were supplemented by the establishment and 
great development of the sciences of comparative anatomy and paleontol- 
ogy. In spite, however, of the improvement and expansion of classification, 
its bearing upon evolution was not generally perceived. Cuvier's researches 
in these sciences further extended the dogma of the fixity of species; but 
Owen, through his broader knowledge, gradually gave up the idea and 
became an evolutionist, although not a selectionist. 

The seventh epoch, the Darwinian, in which happily we are living, has 
seen the overthrow of the traditional doctrine of the fixity of species, and has 
initiated the re-examination of all morphological phenomena in the light of 
the doctrine of evolution. These morphological facts are reflected more 
and more in our evolving classifications, which are the outgrowth of the 
Linnaean system, and which now aim to express, not only degrees of homo- 
logical resemblances and differences, but also (secondarily) degrees of genetic 

The great " lawgiver of natural history " is thus seen in his proper per- 
spective in a few at least of the series of historical antecedents and conse- 
quents which intersected in him, inheriting, as he did on the one hand, the 
language and general methods of the past and the doctrine of special 
creation; inheriting on the other hand the new spirit and contributions of 
Vesalius, Cesalpino, Ray and many others, and building upon this the 
foundations of modern botany and zoology. 

1 Osborn, H. F. From the Greeks to Darwin, p. 129. 


At the close of the reading of Dr. Allen's address, recess was taken till 
two o'clock, p.m. During this time the Council entertained at luncheon 
at the Hermitage Hotel, near Bronx Park, the delegates of sister societies 
and invited guests. Afterward the special exhibits at the Botanical 
Museum were examined, and then was delivered the following address. 


Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: 

I have been asked to make a short address to you on Linnseus and his 
relation to North American botany. That the selection fell on me was not 
because I was the most able one to deliver such an address, for there are 


A plant especially beloved by Linnseus, and dedicated to him by Gronovius. 

many abler men present, but simply because I was born in. the same country 
as Linnseus. In fact, my grandfather came from the same province of 
Smaland and even from a parish adjoining that of Stembrohult, in which 
my illustrious countryman was born. 

In the early part of the seventeenth century there lived in Jonsboda, 


Smaland, Sweden, a fanner named Ingemar Svenson. He had three 
children, two sons and one daughter, the grandmother of Linnaeus. On 
the Jonsboda farm stood a very large linden-tree, so old and with so many 
traditions that it was regarded by the people as a holy tree. Any damage 
done to this tree, it was claimed, would surely bring misfortune upon the 
head of the perpetrator. When the two sons began to study for the ministry, 
it was natural that they should think of this tree in selecting a family name. 
They called themselves Tiliander; Tilia is the Latin for the linden or bass- 
wood, and andros the Greek for man. It may not be amiss to state that at 
that time the common people of Sweden did not have any family names, 
and this is true to a certain extent even to-day. A man was know r n by his 
given name, the given name of his father with the word son appended, and 
the place where he lived. The farmer mentioned above was known as 
Ingemar Svenson from Jonsboda. His father's name was Sven Carlson, 
and that of his grandfather, Carl Johnson. The names of his two sons 
would have been Carl and Sven Ingemarson, had they remained in the 
peasant class, instead of Carl and Sven Tiliander. 

The daughter married a farmer, Ingemar Bengtson; and her son's name 
was Nils Ingemarson, until he entered the "gymnasium." He also was 
born in Jonsboda, and, when selecting a name, he also naturally turned to 
the same old linden-tree as his maternal uncles had done. He called him- 
self Linnoeus. It is remarkable that two of his father's maternal grand- 
uncles also bore another Latin form of the same name, viz., Lindelius. 
Some claim that even this name was derived from the same old linden-tree, 
but this is scarcely in accordance with the facts. More likely it traces its 
origin from the Linden Farm in Dannas Parish, where their ancestors lived. 

But what has this genealogy to do with Linnaeus's relation to North 
American botany? Perhaps nothing directly, but indirectly a great deal; 
for the circumstances and surroundings under which a man is born and 
reared to a certain extent make the man. In his younger days, Sven 
Tiliander was the house-chaplain of Field-Marshal and Admiral- Viscount 
Henrik Horn, who was for many years Governor of Bremen and Verden, 
two cities with territory in Germany acquired by Sweden through the 
Thirty-years War. During his stay in Germany, Tiliander learned to know 
and love botany and horticulture, and established around Viscount Horn's 
residence in Bremen a garden which was remarkable for that period. When 
both returned to Sweden, Tiliander brought with him the choicest plants 
from this garden and planted them around the parsonage of Pjetteryd 
Parish, of which he had been appointed rector. Here at Pjetteryd, Nils 
Linneeus spent most of his youth, studying in company with his uncle's 
sons. Later, both as curate at Rashult and as rector at Stenbrohult, he 


surrounded the parsonages with gardens in which he grew many rare and 
interesting plants. In the midst of these, Carl Linnaeus, the famous botanist, 
was born and reared. Later, while a student at the university, he spent a 
summer vacation at home in 1732, and made a list of the plants in his 
father's garden. This list is still to be seen in the Academy of Science at 
Stockholm. Although defective, the first four classes being unrepresented, 
it enumerates 224 species. Of these, many were at that time very rare in 
cultivation. Professor Theodore Fries in his biography of Linnaeus enumer- 
ates 36 of the rarest of these. Among them we notice six American plants, 
viz., Rkus Toxicodendron, the poison oak, Mirabilis Jalapa, four-o-clock, 
Asckpias syriaca, milkweed, Phytolacca decandra, poke weed, Antennaria 
(now Anaphalis) margaritacea, pearly everlasting, and Solanum tuberosum, 
the potato. It may be remarked that the cultivation of potatoes was 
introduced into Sweden about twenty years later. We see from this that 
Linnaeus had learned to know some American plants even in his early 

Carl Linnaeus was born the 13th of May, O.S., 1707, at Rashult, an 
annex to the parish of Stenbrohult. His father was the curate there; but 
two years later, at the death of his father-in-law, Samuel Broderson, he 
became rector and moved to Stenbrohult. In the fall of 1714, Carl Lin- 
naeus entered the school of Wexio, and graduated from the "gymnasium" 
in 1727. His parents, especially his mother, wanted him to study for the 
ministry; but he had no love for theology, nor for metaphysics, nor the 
classics. He learned Latin tolerably, however, because that language 
helped him to study the natural sciences. He decided to study medicine, 
and entered with that view the University of Lund, which was nearest his 
home, but remained there only one year, learning that there were better 
facilities at Upsala. At the latter place he soon became acquainted with 
Professors Rudbeck and Celsius, two of the most prominent scientists of 
that time, and was allowed to use their libraries. The former, who had 
many duties to perform, soon asked Linnaeus to give for him the public 
lectures in botany. The income from these gave Linnaeus means to sup- 
port himself, and linked him closer to his favorite study. He became 
acquainted with practically all the plants of the gardens and fields of the 
whole region around Upsala, and learned all the scientific names given in the 
books at his disposal. 

The latter was not an easy matter when we take into consideration the 
form of scientific names at that period. For example, the most approved 
name of the common blue-grass that adorns our lawns was, "Gramen 
pratense paniculatum majus, latiore folio, Poa Theophrasti." Other names 
of the same grass were, "Gramen vulgo cognitum" "Gramen pratense 


majus vulgatus," and "Gramen alterum et vulgare." In the first publication 
by Linnaeus, it appears as "Poa spiculis ovatis compressis muticis." I 
think that Linnaeus and his contemporaries had much more cause than 
we to exclaim, "Those horrible Latin names!" To us the same plant is 
known as Poa pratensis L., the name adopted by Linnaeus in his "Species 

The lectures given by Linnaeus for Professor Rudbeck became very 
popular. This was especially the case after his return from his Lapland 
journey. Some persons, especially Dr. Nils Rosen, became jealous of his 
success, and induced the university faculty to pass a resolution by which no 
one who had not taken the corresponding degree was permitted to give 
university lectures. Linnaeus had not yet received his doctor's degree, and 
hence was debarred. As Holland was offering at that time excellent facilities 
both in medicine and in botany, and as living expenses were lower there than 
elsewhere, Linnaeus decided to visit that country and take his examinations 
there. He received his doctor's diploma at Harderwijk, and afterwards 
went to Leyden, where he became acquainted with three of the greatest 
botanists of the time, Boerhaave, Burmann and Gronovius. George 
Cliffort, the wealthy burgomaster of Amsterdam and president of the East 
India Company, was a great lover of plants, and had a splendid botanical 
garden at Hartecamp as well as a rich library and herbarium. On the 
recommendation of Boerhaave, Linnaeus became Cliff ort's physician, and 
curator of his collections and garden. Here he lived in luxury, beloved as 
a son. 

Cliffort furnished Linnaeus with means to publish five of his first books, 
"Systema Naturae," "Fundamenta Botanica," "Bibliotheca Botanica," 
"Genera Plantarum" and "Flora Lapponica," the manuscript of which he 
had brought with him from Sweden. In the first of these, Linnaeus presents 
his system of classification. He divides Nature into three kingdoms, the 
mineral, vegetable and animal. In the vegetable kingdom he brings out 
an altogether new classification, based upon the sexual organs of plants. 
He divides the kingdom into 24 classes, the first 23 containing the phan- 
erogams, and the last the cryptogams. In the first 11 classes are included 
plants which have from 1 to 12 free and practically equal stamens; in the 
12th and the 13th, plants with many stamens; in the 14th and 15th, plants 
with 4 and 6 stamens respectively, of which 2 are decidedly shorter. In the 
16th, 17th and 18th classes the stamens are united by their filaments, in 
the 19th they are united by their anthers, and in the 20th they are adnate to 
the pistil. In the 21st and 22d the flowers are unisexual, i.e., the stamens 
and pistils are in different flowers (on the same individual in the 21st and on 
different individuals in the 22d) ; and the plants of the 23d class have both 


unisexual and bisexual flowers. The classes were divided into orders. 
In the first 13 classes the orders were determined by the number of the 
pistils; in the 14th and 15th, by the fruit; and in the 16th to 18th and 20th 
to 23d, by the number and distinctness or union of the stamens. The classi- 
fication of the 19th class is too complex to enter into here. The 24th class 
was divided into four orders : Filices, Musci, Algae and Fungi. 

This system of classification is purely artificial. Linnaeus himself re- 
garded it only as temporary, and expected that it would soon be supplanted 
by a more rational one, based on natural relationship. The Linnaean 
system served its purpose, however. It became a means by which it was 
possible to tabulate every known genus of plants. Before this time there 
had been no systems at all, or such crude ones as we find even to-day in 
some popular flower-books, where the plants are classified by the color of 
their flowers. If the natural systems of DeCandolle, Bentham and Hooker, 
and Engler and Prantl, are too complicated for popular books, why not go 
back to the simple system of Linnaeus ? It would at least give a good insight 
into the structure of the flower instead of the mere color. 

In his "Genera Plantarum," Linnaeus applied this system to all known 
genera of plants, and gave each of them a concise and plain description. 

Cliffort had many American plants in his garden, but he sent Linnaeus 
to England to visit Sir Hans Sloane, Professor Dillenius and Philip Miller, 
in order to secure American plants grown by them. Both Sloane and 
Dillenius treated Linnaeus at first with coolness, because he "confounded 
botany." On his farewell visit to Dillenius, Linnaeus politely asked him 
what he meant by "confounding botany." Dillenius took from the library 
the first few pages of Linnaeus's own " Genera Plantarum, " and showed him 
where there was written at numerous places "NB." Dillenius stated that 
all the genera so marked were wrongly described. The first example he 
pointed out, if I am not mistaken, was Canna, placed by Linnaeus in his first 
class, which contains plants with but one stamen. Botanists before this 
time had described it as having three stamens. To settle the dispute they 
went out into the garden, and the living plant showed that Linnaeus was 
correct. Dillenius then retained Linnaeus for several days, and found that 
the older botanists in most cases were at fault and the young Swede correct. 
From being an opponent, he became a friend, of Linnaeus and let him have 
all the plants he wanted. 

After his return to Holland, Linnaeus continued his work in CHffort's 
garden with renewed zeal, and completed his "Hortus Cliffortianus," a 
large folio, in which are enumerated and described all the plants found in 
CHffort's collections, together with synonyms and citations of nearly all 
botanical works then in existence. In preparing this work he became 


thoroughly acquainted with almost all the literature referring to American 
botany, such as Morison's "Plantarum Historia," Plukenett's "Almagestrum 
Botanicum" and " Phytographia," Petiver's " Gazophylacium," Sloane's 
"Jamaica," Plumier's "Plantarum Americanarum Genera," "Plantarum 
Americanarum Fasciculus Primus" and "Filicetum Americanum," Catesby's 
"Historia Naturalis," and, later, Cornuti's "Canadensium Plantarum 

After completing the "Hortus Cliffortianus," Linnaeus returned to 
Leyden, where he spent some time helping Gronovius with the editing of 
his "Flora Virginica," based on a large collection of plants collected by 
Clayton. Here again he came in contact with American plants. 

Linnaeus then returned to Sweden and became a practicing physician. 
He was soon appointed professor of medicine at Upsala, but by common 
agreement he exchanged chairs with Rosen, who held the professorship of 
botany. He now began work upon the most important book of his life, 
his "Species Plantarum." In this he tried to include a short description of 
even r known species of plant, together w y ith the most important synonyms 
and citations. In this book the Linnsean binomial system of nomenclature 
was used for the first time. Linnaeus was not the first to give plants names, 
nor was he the first to name genera. Many Latin plant-names had come 
down from antiquity, while others had been proposed by his predecessors. 
Men like Tournefort and Micheli had in some cases clearer ideas of genera 
than Linnaeus himself. Neither was Linnaeus the first one to use binomials. 
In Cornuti's work on Canadian plants, for example, we find almost as many 
binomials as polynomials; but it is doubtful if Linnaeus had seen Cornuti's 
book when he first wrote his "Species Plantarum." He does not cite it in 
the first edition, but does so in the second. Linnaeus was, however, the first 
one to use binomials systematically and consistently. Before his time, 
botanists had recognized genera, and applied to them Latin nouns as names. 
In order to designate species, they added to these nouns adjective descriptive 
phrases. These consisted sometimes of a single adjective, as in Quercus 
alba, the white oak, but more often of a long string of adjectives and adjective 
modifiers, as in the case of the blue-grass mentioned above. The specific 
name had hitherto been merely a description modifying the generic name; 
from this time it became really a name, although a single adjective in form. 
An illustration of the pre-Linnaean form of plant-names might be had if, 
instead of "Grace Darling," one should say, "Mr. Darling's beautiful, 
slender, graceful, blue-eyed girl with long golden curls and rosy cheeks." 
"Grace" is just as descriptive of the girl as this whole string of adjectives. 
It may be that " Grace " is not always applicable to the person to whom the 
name is applied; but this is also often the case with many specific plant- 


names. Asclepias syriaca and Rumex Brittanica are American plants, and 
Rubus deliciosus is one of the least delicious of the raspberry tribe. This 
invention and strict application of binomial names could not but cause 
a revolution in botany. Since the appearance of "Species Plantarum" in 
1753, it has been possible to pigeon-hole not only genera, but also species, of 

Before this useful -book was printed, Linnaeus had become better ac- 
quainted with North American plants, and in another way. Baron Bjelke, 
the vice-president of the Court of Appeals of Finland, had proposed to the 
Royal Academy of Sciences at Stockholm to send an able man to Iceland 
and Siberia, countries partly in the same latitude as Sweden, "to make 
observations, and such collections of seeds and plants as would improve the 
Swedish husbandry, gardening, manufactures, arts and sciences." Dr. 
Linnaeus suggested North America instead, and recommended one of his 
pupils, Professor Pehr Kalm of Abo, for the proposed expedition. Kalm 
spent two years in North America, traveling through Pennsylvania, New 
Jersey, New York and Canada, and making large collections of seeds and 
plants, which were preserved as living or dried specimens, or as alcoholic 
material. During his stay at Raccoon, N. J., he discovered our mountain- 
laurel. The Swedes of Raccoon called it spoon-tree, because the Indians 
made spoons from its hard wood. Kalm adds in his journal, about this 
tree, "The English call this tree a laurel, because its leaves resemble 
those of the Laurocerasus. Linnaeus, conformably to the peculiar friend- 
ship and goodness which he has honored me with, has pleased to call this 
tree Kalmia foliis ovalis, corymbis terminalibus, or Kalmia latifolia." Here 
Linnaeus himself gave an illustration of both the pre-Linnaean and the post- 
Linnaean nomenclature. Kalm became acquainted with several of the 
naturalists of this country, C. Golden and his daughter Jane, Bartram and 
Clayton, and through Kalm a correspondence was established between 
them and Linnaeus. Linnaeus also corresponded with John Ellis, who 
resided in the West Indies, and Dr. Gardiner, who botanized in Carolina 
and Florida. Later he bought a set of plants collected by Patrick Browne 
in Jamaica, and received a part of the collections made by Jacquin in the 
West Indies. 

When the second edition of the "Species Plantarum" appeared, in 1762, 
Linnaeus knew and had described nearly 1000 plants indigenous to the 
United States and Canada. Besides these, he described about 1000 more, 
natives of the West Indies, Mexico and Central America, and 400 or 500 
South American plants. His knowledge of American plants was small 
compared with what he knew of plants of the Old World. " Codex Lin- 
nseanus," which enumerates all plants named by Linnaeus, contains not 
fewer than 8551 species. 


Linnaeus died Jan. 10, 1778, honored and esteemed by all. Some of 
his work will doubtless live as long as botany is studied by man. . 

We see from the preceding account that we may consider Linnaeus one 
of our American botanists. Even the little plant which Gronovius dedicated 
to the Father of Botany, the twin-flower of our woods, with its exquisite 
perfume and its dainty pink flowers, belongs to a genus essentially North 
American. The genus Linncea contains four forms, all closely related. One 
of these, the original Linncea borealis, is confined to the mountain regions 
of northern and central Europe. Linnaeus discovered it on his Lapland 
journey, and it was then considered a very rare plant. Now it seems to be 
more widely distributed than it was at the time of Linnaeus. Perhaps it is 
of American origin, and has become modified since it transplanted itself on 
the other side of the ocean. The other three forms are North American. 
Linncea americana Forbes, which has usually been confounded with its 
European cousin, is common in the woods from Labrador to Alaska, and 
extends in the Rocky Mountains as far south as New Mexico. L. longiflora 
(Torr.) Howell, is found in the mountains from northern California to 
Alaska. The fourth form is, as far as I know, undescribed and unnamed. 
It is with great pleasure that I here propose the following name and descrip- 
tion for this species. 

Ltnnsea serpyllifolia sp. nov. 

A delicate plant with long creeping stems, 1-4 dm. long, sparingly hirsute; 
petioles 23 mm. long, ciliate; blades broadly oval or round-ovate, 5-8 mm. 
long, minutely crenulate, obtuse, sparingly hirsute, more or less coriaceous 
and shining, slightly paler beneath; peduncles 3-5 cm. long, sparingly 
pubescent and more or less glandular above, 2-flowered; bracts 2-3 mm. 
long, linear or lance-linear, obtuse; pedicels 5-8 mm. long, glandular- 
pubescent; hypanthium subglobose, in flower slightly over 1 mm. long, 
glandular-puberulent, purplish; calyx-lobes 2-2.5 mm. long, linear-subulate; 
corolla pink, open-funnelform with a very short tube, decidedly oblique, 
about 6 mm. long and 5 mm. wide. 

This species differs from L. borealis and L. americana in the very narrow 
and almost glabrous calyx-lobes. In this respect, it agrees with L. longi- 
flora; but it is distinguished from that species by the differently shaped 
corolla and by the leaves, which are broadest at or below the middle, instead 
of above it. It differs from all three in the smaller size of the flower and of 
the leaves, and in the indistinct toothing of the latter. 

Alaska: Cape Nome, 1900, F. E. Blaisdell (Type in herb. N.Y. Bot. 
Gard.); Kotzebue Sound, Arnott. 


Apparently the same plant has also been collected on the Island of 
Sachalin by F. Schmidt, but his specimens lack flowers. 

After Dr. Rydberg's address, Professor H. H. Rusby gave an exhibition 
of selected lantern slides of flowers of North American plants known to 
Linnaeus, and then Dr. W. A. Murrill led the party southward from the 
Museum building, through the Garden, to the Linnaeus Bridge, pointing out 
on the way the following characteristic American trees known to Linnseus. 
Tulip-tree White ash White elm 

Sweet-gum Sugarberry Red oak 

Red maple Flowering dogwood White oak 

Red cedar Sassafras Hemlock 

Sweet birch Buttonwood Chestnut-oak 

White pine Butternut American linden 

At the Linnseus Bridge over the Bronx River, on Pelham Parkway, 
Professor N. L. Britton, President of the New York Academy of Sciences, 
unveiled the bronze tablet commemorative of Linnseus which had been 
placed there by the Academy with the consent of the Department of Parks 
of the city of New York, and made the following address. 



Director-in-chief, New York Botanical Garden. 

The recognition of the work of famous men is one of the happiest duties 
of mankind. It stimulates our endeavors and encourages us to make efforts 
which we would probably not make without their examples before us. 

To-day we do homage to a distinguished man of science, and the una- 
nimity with which the scientific societies and institutions of the city of 
New York join in this tribute is in itself evidence of the value which is 
placed upon his contributions to natural history. 

Science has made great progress during the two centuries which have 
elapsed since the birth of Linnseus. Theories have in large part given 
place to ascertained facts, or have been replaced by other theories based 
on more accurate knowledge of natural objects and of natural phenomena. 
The contributions of science to the welfare, comfort and happiness of 
mankind, have made present human life widely different from that of two 


hundred years ago; and this amelioration of our condition, and the more 
general diffusion of knowledge, have been accompanied by a vast improve- 
ment in morality. 

The ceremonies of to-day are worthy of the great naturalist whose birth 
they commemorate. Societies and institutions all over the world join with 
us in honoring him, and are represented here by delegates, or have trans- 
mitted documents expressing their appreciation of his life and labors. The 
public natural science institutions of New York have come to take leading 
parts in the subjects they teach and illustrate. Public and private philan- 
thropy have developed them with a rapidity almost phenomenal, for they 
are all yet in their infancy and on a scale commensurate with the dignity of 
the metropolis of America. The cordial co-operation of a municipality with 
public-spirited citizens to build and maintain such institutions for the 
welfare of the people and of science, finds here in New York its maximum 
evolution, which has as yet, however, by no means reached its complete 
development or its maximum usefulness. What will be said of their posi- 
tion and importance when after fifty years the New York Historical Society 
opens the tablet which we now place upon this bridge ? And what discov- 
eries will science have made for the benefit of the human race during this 
next fifty years ? 

The selection of this bridge, recently constructed by the Park Depart- 
ment, as a permanent memorial of Linnaeus, is most appropriate. It is 
situated just outside the New York Zoological Park, with the New York 
Botanical Garden a short distance to the north, being thus between the two 
institutions which teach the subjects on which the fame of Linnaeus chiefly 
rests. The suggestion that it be known hereafter as the Linnaean Bridge 
came from the Director of the American Museum of Natural History. 

On behalf of the New York Academy of Sciences I now unveil this 
tablet, and present it to the city of New York, there having been placed 
in it copies of to-day's program and other documents befitting the occa- 

After Wennerberg's song, rendered by the American Union of Swedish 
Singers, "Hear us, Svea," Hon. Joseph I. Berry, Commissioner of Parks of 
the Borough of the Bronx, in a few fitting words accepted the tablet on 
behalf of the city of New York, and then delivered the key of the box 
within the tablet to the New York Historical Society, for preservation till 
May 23, 1957. These ceremonies were followed by the singing, by the 
chorus, of Lindblad's "Battle Hymn," and then the audience listened to 
the following two addresses. 




Linnaeus was a great scientist, and the conquests of science have done 
more to advance the world than wars, which science may yet render im- 
possible. It was thirty years of scientific research in Germany that gave 
us artificial indigo. It was pure scientific research that led Moissan, Cowles 
and Acheson to discover independently an abrasive substance of a hardness 
between the diamond and the sapphire; and then Moissan by scientific 
deduction worked out the genesis of the hardest and most fearless of gems, 
which, though obtained only in the form of powder, was still the diamond. 
Within the past quarter of a century we have seen air, oxygen and hydrogen 
liquefied, giving us temperatures absolutely unknown in nature before, and 
also the electric furnace, giving an extreme heat such as has perhaps never 
existed, unless it be on the surface of the sun. 

Jade, the Chinese stone, has been known in China for more than a 
thousand years. Some believe that it was known to a prehistoric race the 
existence of which was almost unknown to the Chinese, and whose only 
records extant are found as we find the evidences left of the mound-builders, 
who passed away before the advent of the white man in North America. It 
was not until 1866 that Damour, a scientist, separated jade into two distinct 
minerals, nephrite and jadeite; and one of those into two varieties, jadeite 
and chloromelanite facts unknown to the Chinese, though they apparently 
knew and understood every tiny fragment they had ever seen of this mineral. 
It was the scientist who took three red stones belonging to the King of 
Burmah or to the Emperor of China, and proved to him that one was a 
ruby, one was a spinel, and the third a tourmaline, and not all rubies, as 
they had been regarded for a century or more previously. 

Moses was the first great systematizer, and his original assemblage of 
the people in tens, hundreds and thousands, is carried out in the military 
systems of to-day, and is again reflected in our own and in the monetary 
systems of many of the European nations, and more especially in that indis- 
pensable and scientific international system of weights and measures, the 
metric system. It was Alexander who conquered the eastern world, bring- 
ing back with him mucli refinement, and possibly also the valuable and 
industrious silkworm; and it was he also who discovered that the carrying 
powers of his camels were doubled if he employed a gold medium of exchange 
instead of silver. Caesar, in his attempt to conquer the world, did much 


toward the dissemination of education and civilization, from which Rome 
greatly benefited. 

Napoleon upturned and readjusted the treasuries of a number of king- 
doms, duchies, cloisters and churches in Europe; and, even though his 
regime was attended by frightful loss of life, marked and permanent improve- 
ment has followed it. But it was La Sage, a scientist, who compiled a 
great work for Napoleon, from which he learned what noble families had 
lived in all times, and what campaigns had been fought by the various 
conquerors; and it was a thorough study of La Sage's work that had much 
to do with giving Napoleon an idea as to what worlds others had conquered, 
and what parts of this world were left for him to subdue. 

It may not be generally known that it was one of our New York scientists, 
Dr. Melvil Dewey, who introduced the card catalogue system of catalo- 
guing books, which led to the present system of keeping books by. the loose- 
leaf system. 

It would be easy to mention many who have materially assisted in the 
advancement and organization of the multifarious affairs of mankind; but 
the other and lower creations of nature outnumbered mankind many thou- 
sand times, and the co-ordination of scientific nomenclature covering this 
vast domain is due to the great Carl von Linne. Until his time, an animal 
was known as a deer in English, a Hirsh in German, a cerf in French, and by 
fifty other names in as many different languages. By applying two or three 
words as a name to every creature that flies in the heavens above, that dwells 
in the earth beneath or in the waters under the earth, he made it possible 
for the scientist, whether at the Cape of Good Hope, in Greenland, in New 
York, or in the Sandwich Islands, to know not only just what living form 
was referred to, but also to understand immediately to just what genus, 
class, species or variety, this living organism belongs. 

The Linnsean system has also greatly aided scientific classification in 
natural history, which, in connection with medicine, has given us the con- 
necting link in the science of biology and bacteriology. The Linnaean 
system compares with the natural history of to-day as alchemy does with 
chemistry, as astrology and fortune-telling with astronomy and medicine of 
the present time. 

It is strange that, as well-planned and admirable and successful as the 
Linnsean system is when applied to the nomenclature of animate objects, 
it was absolutely rejected by the then mineralogists and chemists, as the 
chemical equivalents and the structure are frequently better expressed by a 
single term than they would be by a binominal system. 

Had a Linnsean system existed when Adam and Eve were in the Garden 
of Eden, there would be no dispute to-day as to whether the "apple" which 


caused their expulsion from the Garden was the identical kind of apple 
that has caused so many boys to be driven from gardens and orchards 
wherein they trespass to-day, or whether it was a pomegranate, an orange, 
a lemon, or some other fruit of which we have no knowledge. If Noah had 
known a Linnaean system when he took his animals into the ark, and had 
so named them, how helpful that would be to us to-day! There would not 
be the doubt in the minds of the few who still maintain that evidences of 
the flood are to be found in fossil remains, since these would belong to those 
animals that were destroyed at the time of the great flood. 

We have recorded a history of the past, to-day we have heard much of 
Linnaeus and his time: let us speak now of the present. For a quarter of a 
century it has been our pleasure to know one of the most ardent disciples of 
Linnaeus that has lived in our land; and had it not been for his untiring zeal, 
his keen judgment, his constant application, it is a question whether we 
would be assembled to-day to dedicate this bridge to the memory of Linnaeus. 
We remember twenty-five years ago when he first appeared before the 
Academy of Sciences, and it is almost that long ago that he first suggested 
a botanical garden. The Botanical Garden undoubtedly influenced the 
Zoological Park, and each successive scientific institution has strengthened 
the others, so that, as science stands united to-day, New York is perhaps 
and will long remain one of the leading scientific cities in the country, if not 
the foremost; and no one more than our esteemed President of the New 
York Academy of Sciences, and Director of the Botanical Garden, Dr. N. 
L. Britton, has assisted in the unification and the advancement of our greatest 
Academy of Sciences. Dr. Britton was the pioneer with the Botanical 
Garden. Professor Henry Fairfield Osborn, another disciple of Linnaeus, 
was the pioneer in the Zoological Park, which has been so ably conducted 
and carried on through that indefatigable worker, Dr. W. T. Hornaday, 
who brought to his task a world-wide experience of animals, their habitats 
and their characters. Therefore it seems eminently fitting that this bridge 
should form a connecting link between these two Siamese Twins, as it were, 
of botany and zoology in the United States. 

It is science that gives us this well-ordered Bronx Botanical Garden, 
which, beautiful as it is, is a living botanical exposition, made possible 
through the organization of Linnaeus, the energy, industry and intelligence 
of a Britton, the generosity of the founders and its trustees and the encour- 
agement of our great city of New York. 

Although historic sites and buildings may be marked with tablets or with 
monuments of stones, yet it was Nero who removed the Greek inscription, 
and placed his own, over the architrave of the Parthenon. In 1881 we were 
surprised to see some stone-cutters removing from within the laurel wreaths 


on the arches of the bridge across the River Seine the raised letter N placed 
there by Napoleon III, and a few days later to see them incise the letters 
R. F. (Republique Fran9aise) where the N had formerly been. 

The value of preserving historic sites or commemorating historic events 
by indestructible means, such as medals or engraving in stone or metal, 
has always served as a great benefit to those who were to follow. A simple 
tablet on the summit of the Jura Mountains tells one when, where and how 
the great Napoleon crossed those mountains. A tablet in Russia relates 
that Napoleon entered Russia at this point with seven hundred and twenty 
thousand men, and less than a year later returned with an army of only a 
hundred and twenty thousand, having lost six hundred thousand. 

The use of metal and baked tiles for the perpetuation of portraits and 
historic events forms one of the most feasible and enduring means. It is 
due to the coins and the medals that have been struck since about the 
seventh century B.C. that we have an almost unbroken line, for the past 
twenty-four centuries, of portraits and history; and to Assyrian baked 
tablets, that we have some four thousand years of history recorded. 

There should be a most stringent law, a national law, rigidly enforced, 
for the punishment of any vandal who destroys, either wantonly or for the 
purpose of loot, any monument, as, for instance, the Andr6 Monument on 
the banks of the Hudson and the tablet marking the Slocum disaster. 

It is the honor and pleasure of the American Scenic and Historic Preser- 
vation Society to take part in this historic event, and it is its official function 
to describe accurately the event in its Annual Report edited by our able 
Secretary, Edward Hagaman Hall, and published by order of the Legislature 
of this State. So the record of this event will appear in series with that of 
the dedication of Stony Point as a park; the re-dedication of the Andre" 
Monument; the preservation of the Palisades; the McGowan's Pass tablet; 
more recently the acceptance of the gift of three miles of one of the most 
beautiful ravines on the continent, containing three fine waterfalls, presented 
to our State by the Honorable William Pryor Letchworth, for which the 
Society is to act as a Trustee; and the State's acquisition of Watkins Glen. 




I do not intend te encroach upon your time by attempting to make a 
long speech, but I consider it my duty as president of the United Swedish 
Societies to express to you, Mr. President, and to the members of the New 
York Academy of Sciences, our gratitude for the opportunity you have 
given us to take part in honoring the memory of our distinguished country- 
man Linnaeus, whom we are used to call the "Flower King of the North." 
To be sure, our participation in this celebration is limited to the assistance 
given by our singing societies and to the presence of a goodly number of our 
people in the park. The Swedish minister to Washington, Mr. Lagercrantz, 
is also with us, and I take this opportunity to convey to you, Your Excellency, 
our appreciation of the interest you have shown by coming to New York 
to-day. Our consul and vice-consul are also with us. 

I saw a statement in a paper a few days ago to the effect that Swedes 
in New York have presented this beautiful bridge to the city. I only wish 
that such were the case; but unfortunately we are only about fifty thousand 
strong in this neighborhood. Such a gift might well be possible out West, 
where, as you know, most of the Swedish immigrants settle, but not here. 
Indeed, there are parts of the West and Northwest, where for miles upon 
miles you will find Swedish settlements almost exclusively, and all in pros- 
perous condition. In Chicago the Swedes have even erected a statue to 
the memory of Linnaeus, a duplicate of one erected in Stockholm just twenty 
years ago to-day. I remember the date well, because I took part in the 
celebration, being a student in Stockholm at the time. 

It is a great satisfaction to us Swedes, that Linnaeus, whose memory is 
to-day honored all over the globe, was a man of peace. Every one has heard 
of our Gustavus Adolphus and Charles XII, not to mention the old vikings ; 
but our great scientific men such as Linnaeus, Berzelius, Scheele, Celsius, 
Edlund, Rudbeck and others are known only to a select few. Even John 
Ericsson the great engineer, whose statue has been erected in Battery Park 
by the city of New York, is remembered and honored only on account of 
his ship of war, the "Monitor." The fact that he invented the fire-engine, 
the propeller, the solar engine, the hot-air engine and other wonderful 
machinery, is well-nigh forgotten, though we have in the city to-day about 
fifteen thousand pumping engines run with heated air on Ericsson's prin- 
ciples, and the solar engine is being used more and more in California. 


His work was work of peace of the very highest character, and to be com- 
mended as such. 

There is one part of Linnseus's life-work which may not have been 
referred to to-day, and that is his work as an archeologist. While pursuing 
his studies in botany and zoology, Linnaeus naturally traveled a great deal 
around the country; in doing this, he made careful notes of the mounds, 
runestones and other marks left by the ancient inhabitants, which marks are 
very abundant all over Sweden. In fact, his writings on this subject have 
formed a basis for the very interesting archeology of Sweden. Personally, 
I have derived much more pleasure from this part of Linnseus's writings 
than I have from the others, although once upon a time I did know the Latin 
names of a few hundred plants. Once more I thank you, Mr. President, in 
behalf of the Swedes of New York, and I will close by proposing a cheer for 
the memory of Linnaeus, and will ask the singers to assist me with a gen- 
uine Swedish hurrah. 

At the close of the exercises at the Bridge, many people, in spite of the 
lateness of the hour, walked through the New York Zoological Park to note 
American animals known to Linnaeus. The party was under the guidance 
of Director Hornaday and Messrs. Ditmars, Beebe and Blair. 

In the evening the literary exercises of the day were continued at the 
Museum of the Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences, Eastern Parkway, 
Brooklyn. After brief opening remarks by Mr. F. A. Lucas, Director of 
the Museum, the following address was read. 


There is something of human interest in the personal side of any one's 
life, if we but know an avenue of approach. Such avenues are closed to 
most of us for most lives. The public careers of great men are matters of 
recorded or current history. The professional activities and writing of men 
of science are open to those interested along similar lines; but often there 
is little opportunity to know the personal and characteristic things which 
are the real foundation and basis of success among men. 

Our presiding officer has elsewhere said, "In some ways the career of 
Linnaeus reminds one of a good old-fashioned fairy story in which the hero 
continually is being provided for. Time after time, Linnaeus was taken up 


by some man of wealth who practically supported him and gave him oppor- 
tunities for study and research. 

"Either genius was rarer in those days than now, or else it received more 
substantial recognition." 

In 1706, Nils Linnaeus, a Swedish pastor, and his bride Christina, began 
their home life in his parish in Rashult in Smaland in southern Sweden. 
About their cottage he had planted a garden of flowers according to a taste 
developed while living with an uncle. In this garden the young bride took 
special delight, only to grieve sorely at the effects of the heavy winter frosts, 
but reacting to the hope and anticipation of the awakening of spring. Here 
were more than four hundred species of exotic plants. For such a latitude 
and for such a period of the world's history, this was a most unusual col- 

In the midst of the spring advent of the flowers, in May, 1707, there was 
born a son in the home of the parish leader. He was baptized "Carl." 
To-day we celebrate, in honor and praise, the birth of Carl Linncsus. 

The following year, the family moved to Stenbrohult, to which were also 
removed most of the plants from the garden at Rashult. 

As soon as the boy Carl could walk, he daily visited the new garden with 
his father, where he was the more attracted to the flowers because in his 
babyhood the parents had often attracted his attention by many bright 
blossoms. A little later he had a bed for his own flowers, which he chose 
from the main garden. Later still, he was given a plot for his own garden 
beside his father's. At four years of age, after a visit to a country fair, he 
so persisted in asking questions that he practically knew all his father could 
tell him, the Swedish names and the uses of the native plants. 

Typically, his mother delighted in the boy's absorption in the flowers 
(she was fond of them too), besides, this often kept the boy occupied for 
hours, an important item in the daily program of the young housekeeping 

Boylike, oftener than not Carl forgot the answers to his questions. His 
father noticed this and called the habit mischievous, and refused to answer 
further questions till the boy promised to remember what was told him. 
This parental training became of the highest value to the future Linnaeus. 

Many of the relatives of Nils Linnaeus were ordained to the service of the 
church. It was in the wife's heart to have their son be the same. But 
he was averse to all reading not related to natural history or more particu- 
larly to botany. His chief activity was to wander over the fields and 
through the woods, bring home every new species he found, plant some, 
and dry and preserve others. With these he brought in several weeds, 
which caused no end of trouble to his father, as they spread to the beds of 


exotic plants. He became so proficient in his knowledge of the local plants 
that the neighbors all called him "the little Botanicus." 

The story goes, that one day his mother found that he had even appro- 
priated her much-treasured Bible in which to press some new-found flowers, 
and she began gently rating him for this. 

"Dear child," she said, "you must not put herbs and flowers in my 
beautiful book. It would be quite a sin to spoil the Holy Bible." 

"Pray forgive me, mother! But these are the most beautiful flowers I 
have ever seen, so I thought I would preserve them best of all, for I have 
heard both you and father say that the Bible is the Book of Life; and 
surely, if I put the flowers between its leaves, they will retain their color, 
the Bible keeping them alive forever." 

" Child, when we call the Bible the Book of Life, we mean by that, not 
the life we see before us, but the spiritual growth of our souls, for every 
thought we think is a flower culled in the garden of our soul. There, as 
on earth, grow many various plants, some of wondrous beauty, and others 
stained with sin. But every time we humbly read in the Sacred Writ, a seed 
is sown in our heart, which some day will bloom, and bear holy fruit." 

"How beautifully you talk, mother! " 

"Well, you must diligently read your Bible, and in your heart will grow 
the seed of goodness and humility; but I fear" 

"What do you fear, mother?" 

" I fear you love the fair flowers of the earth too much to care for the seeds 
that were watered with tears in the Garden of Gethsemane." 

"O mother! no, I won't forget my Bible. But when I see a flower 
I think this way, ' Why does God make the cold, damp earth grow such 
lovely creatures with such beautiful colors ? Why, if not to make us happy 
with the sight?' And then I almost fancy the flowers saying with their 
petal lips, 'Look at us, and think how kind and good is God.' O mother! 
every flower must have been a thought by God." 

"Why, how you speak, child! Well, yes, you are right: it must be so." 

When Carl was ten years old, after an unfortunate experience with a 
private tutor, he was sent to Wexio, the capital of the diocese, to the grammar 
and higher grades. But here he failed because there was no teacher to lead 
and inspire him, but only those to drive. The boy mentally refused to be 
driven. Shortly he was put again under a tutor somewhat better than the 
former one; but in every subject except Nature he was considered a dunce. 

In eight years his father, with sorrow in his heart, became convinced that 
Carl never would make a preacher. His mother, realizing this also, rued 
the love she had felt for the flowers and the interest on his part which she 
sadly had fostered, and with pique declared to her second son, Samuel, that 
he never should devote himself to so useless and wasteful a study as flowers. 


In the words of another, "In this great distress, Pastor Linnaeus called 
Xipon a friend Dr. Rothman, a physician of Wexio who also taught physiol- 
ogy and botany in the school. His verdict, however, was, 'Well, a preacher 
Carl certainly never will be, but he might become a famous physician; and 
that profession will feed a man as well as the church. Your son is far 
advanced in natural history, and, without gainsaying, the foremost scholar 
in botany. If you will permit, I will take him into my house : he shall eat 
at my table gratis, and I will myself read with him during the year that 
remains before he can proceed to a university.' It need not be told how 
gladly father and son accepted this generous and well-timed offer." 

Carl now removed to Dr. Rothman; and this learned gentleman with 
great discernment made it clear to his protege of what great advantage, and 
how indispensable, were Latin and Greek for the study of medicine, botany 
and natural history. 

The dead languages now became endowed with a living new interest, 
and instead of Justinius and Cicero, he studied with enthusiasm Pliny's 
" Natural History," performing thus a double study at the same time. 

Dr. Rothman grew daily more and more attached to his pupil, who 
made amazing progress, and whose transcendent genius became more and 
more evident. He found great delight in guiding the young naturalist in 
his studies, but soon found, with little surprise and no envy, that his pupil 
far outstripped himself, for Linnaeus could acquire no more from him. 

Linnaeus must enter the university, and nothing remained but to get the 
certificate from the Wexio school. It was framed in very quaint and signifi- 
cant words; and it is curious that the trope of a tree, carried all through, 
should have been applied to the future of the professor of botany. It read 
as follows: "The youths in schools may be likened unto young saplings in a 
plantation, where it sometimes happens, although seldom, that young trees, 
despite the great care bestowed on them, will not improve by being en- 
grafted, but continue like wild untrained stems, and when they are finally 
removed and transplanted, they change their wild nature, and become 
beautiful trees that bear excellent fruit. In which this respect, and no other, 
this youth is now promoted to the University, where, perhaps, he may come 
to a clime that will favor his further development." W T ith this recommen- 
dation Carl Linnaeus went to Lund, the southern university of Sweden, in 

Here Linnaeus boarded and lodged at the house of one Strobaeus, who 
lectured in the university on natural history, geology, and botany. He was 
a man of acknowledged great learning in these sciences, and possessed a 
large private collection of stones, shell, biids and dried herbs. At this house 
also lived a German student of medicine, Koulas, eight years the senior of 


Linnaeus, who had the use of Strobaeus's library, and who took upon himself 
secretly to lend his young friend what books he required in botany. The old 
mother of the learned host had observed that a light burned in the small 
hours of the night in Linnaeus's room, and, fearing fire, told her son, who 
quietly one night went up to Linnseus's room to surprise the negligent fellow, 
but was himself surprised to find the student in the dead of night busily 
comparing the varying opinions of the greatest botanists of his time. This 
surprise won the admiration of the teacher and his affection, and he at oiice 
gave Linnaeus the use of his library freely, and the keys to his collections, and, 
like Rothman, took the liveliest interest in the gigantic strides of progress. 

In 1728, Linnaeus changed to the University of Upsala to study under the 
renowned professors Roberg and Rudbeck. Here Linnaeus suffered much 
from poverty, often having barely enough food to sustain life. At length, 
under dire necessity, he was about to start for home to his father, when he 
made a last visit to the garden of the university. Just then there was a 
rare exotic plant in bloom. Linnaeus picked the flower, and was sharply 
reprimanded by a voice behind him. He explained that it was for a me- 
mento of the place, which he was now obliged to leave permanently. This 
aroused the interest and question of the dean, as it proved, Celsius, senior. 
A result of this incident was, that Celsius saved Linnaeus to science then and 
there by taking him to his own house, giving him new and large opportunities 
at the university, tiding over the time of distress, and procuring for him 
opportunities as private tutor to some of the students below him. 

Here Linnaeus brought out his little thesis developing his sexual system 
of grouping plants. From now on, Linnaeus had a constant chain of promo- 
tions, spiced, disagreeably now and then, by jealousies wrought against him, 
but consisting of the delights of extensive, dangerous and economic travels, 
new positions of teaching and lecturing at home and abroad, and finally the 
full chair of botany at the University of Upsala. 

His greatest and ultimate joy was in the knowledge that his system of 
plant relationships became, before his death, the commonly accepted system 
of the civilized world. 

To his credit be it recorded again, that his system is the foundation of all 
modern concepts of the sexual evolution and differentiation, and consequent 
relationships, of all known plants and animals, and especially of their nomen- 

His personal and professional interest were so broad as to include special 
studies in insects and birds and in general zoology, as time allowed diver- 
gence from his life-work in botany. His writings covered the living things 
of the Old and New Worlds, and comprised some seventy or more titles. 

His personality was of the kind which inspired every pupil coming under 


him to branch out for himself in some line of natural history. His students 
became scattered throughout the world. 

Up to the last, and as much as his failing health would allow, Linnaeus 
kept up a lively and progressive interest in his science. 

Finally, tired of life, and forgetful of all honors which had been so keen a 
delight to him, he passed beyond peacefully on the 10th of January, 1778. 

His works and his name live forever. 

At the conclusion of Dr. Morris's address a musical selection was 
rendered by the Glee Club of the United Swedish Societies, after which the 
following address was delivered. 


I presume that the question first in the minds of many present is, Why 
have we met this evening? why should we celebrate the two hundredth 
birthday of Linnaeus? 

In a general way, Linnaeus may be said to have systematized the study 
of natural history, and arranged its known facts in an orderly manner; but 
his special claim to our gratitude is the invention or perfection of what is 
called the "binomial system" of nomenclature, that is, the use of the double 
name for each species of plant or animal. This may seem a small matter. 
In fact, those who ask Why doesn't every animal have a common name ? 
might think they had reason to feel anything but grateful; but it was really 
one of the greatest advances made in natural history. For in science it is not 
enough to accumulate facts, they must be set in order, or classified, so as 
to be available. In fact, Huxley termed science "classified knowledge." 
Before the day of Linnaeus, animals were mainly known by their descriptions 
or their vernacular name. The lion, for instance, would be called the 
"great tan-colored cat with a mane;" and, in order to indicate what species 
were related, it would be necessary to specify them each and all. 

As the rising tide of commerce of the eighteenth century brought to 
Europe scores of animals previously unknown, the number of recognized 
species increased so rapidly that it promised to be a difficult matter to keep 
track of them. It was at this time that Linnaeus devised the plan of apply- 
ing to each animal a general or generic name which should indicate the 
immediate group to which the animal belonged, and a special or specific 


name to apply to that particular kind of animal alone. And so binomial 
nomenclature was born. It has been claimed that Linnaeus was not the 
first to use the binomial system, but, if not, he was certainly the first to 
employ it consistently and to frame rules relating to such use. Linnaeus 
wrote in Latin not as a matter of affectation, but because Latin was the 
common language of culture and science, and to this day many naturalists 
still write descriptions of new species in Latin, or preface their accounts 
with a brief diagnosis in that language. Had he written in Swedish, his 
native tongue, his audience would have been a small one, probably limited 
to his native land; as it was, his works were understood by all the natu- 
ralists of the day. Hence his scientific names which were Latin names 
are, like a gold coin, current the world over, while the so-called "popular 
name " is restricted in its use, and circulates only in the country where it 
is coined. 

But Linnaeus did much more than devise a scheme of nomenclature : he 
systematically defined each and every group of plants and animals with 
which he dealt, giving their chief characters in a few brief words; and the 
small groups, or genera, he combined in large divisions termed "orders." 
It matters not that the genera of Linnaeus have since been divided and sub- 
divided many times, the underlying principle of assigning certain definite 
characters to each animal remains the same. 

Linnaeus was a born classifier. He was not happy until he had duly set 
in order the facts and objects that came under his notice; and while he did 
not, it is true, carry this to the extent of the eccentric Rafinesque, who made 
several genera and species of thunder and lightning, he did propose a system 
of classification for diseases wherein they were duly assigned to their respec- 
tive families and genera. 

To many the term "classification " is repellant. It seems to signify some- 
thing with which the ordinary man has nothing to do, when really it is some- 
thing with which every one is, or should be, concerned; for classification is 
simply arranging things in their proper places, and putting things of a kind 
together. And the man who puts his cuffs in one place, his collars in another, 
and arranges his shoes in a row on the top shelf of a closet, is a classifier. 

The naturalist is confronted by the same problem as a general, that of 
grouping or arranging the various plants or animals so that he may know 
where each one is to be found, or where to assign any new form that may 
come to light. For an army is not merely a large number of armed men, 
it is an orderly assemblage of men so classed and grouped that they can be 
handled by one man. And the classification of the animal kingdom, for 
example, is very similar to that of an army, and to the same end, that any 
one may put into its proper place each of the thousands of units with which 
he has to do. 


And Linnaeus marshaled plants and animals as a general marshals his 
troops. And just as an army is composed of thousands of individuals, dis- 
tinguished as officers and privates, formed into companies, regiments, 
brigades and divisions, so the thousands of species composing the animal 
kingdom are grouped into genera, families, orders, classes and phyla. In 
doing this, Linnaeus instituted many minor reforms; for example, his char- 
acters were given in a definite order, and following the diagnosis was the 
synonymy, or list of names under which the animal had been described, 
and works in which it had been published. He was the first to strip 
natural history of its verbiage, and express himself in clear and concise 
language, and, had he lived to-day, I doubt not he would have been an 
advocate of spelling reform. 

And yet, after all, this scheme of nomenclature is but a part of the ser- 
vice Linnaeus rendered to natural history. It is not merely that his genius 
grasped the fact that nature was order, and that he devised methods for 
expressing this order; his zeal in the pursuit of knowledge gave a stimulus 
and purpose to the study of natural history that it had never felt before. In 
a way, his influence may be said to have been much like that of Agassiz in 
the United States, "He imbued [his pupils] with his own intense acquisitive- 
ness, reared them in an atmosphere of enthusiasm, trained them to close 
and accurate observation, and then despatched them to various parts of the 
globe." It was not so much what he knew himself as the enthusiasm he 
inspired in others, that made him a power felt throughout the world. 

It must ever be borne in mind that nomenclature, or the naming of 
plants and animals, is not the end of natural history, but only a means to an 
end, a fact that many of our younger naturalists are prone to overlook. 
Too many of them seem to think that the great aim of the naturalist is to 
write "new species" after as many names as possible, when, to my mind at 
least, the making of new species is the most trivial work of the naturalist. 
It is important work, but only a step on the pathway of knowledge. The 
real problems are, Why do these species exist? what forces have brought 
them into existence? and what are their relations with one another? 

The man who heard an overture for the first time, after listening a while 
turned to his friend with the query, When are they going to stop tuning up, 
and commence to play ? So you may wonder why I chose for the title of this 
address "Linnaeus and American Natural History." The truth is that 
Linnaeus is so intimately connected with all natural history, that American 
natural history forms but a small part of the whole. And yet Linnseus was 
intimately concerned with the development of American natural history by 
his acquaintance with those men of science who were gathering and making 
known the fauna and flora of this continent ; and as plants and animals were 


brought to Europe, most of them found their way to Linnaeus, and many 
were definitely named by him for the first time. The twelfth edition of the 
famous "Systema Naturae" describes 210 mammals, 78 of which are Ameri- 
can (including under that term North and South America); 790 birds are 
noted, of which 260 are American; and 88 of the 124 reptiles are also 

We think of Audubon, Baird, Coues and Ridgway as the great American 
ornithologists, and they are great; but a glance at the check-list of the 
American Ornithologists' Union shows how prominent a part was played by 
Linnaeus. The list of 1889 gives 729 species and subspecies. No less than 
202 of these were named by Linnaeus ; while Audubon, the father of American 
ornithology, named but 33. Twenty-five bear the sign-manual of Coues, 
and 104 of Ridgway. We must, it is true, remember that a considerable 
number of the birds named by Linnaeus are species common to Europe and 
North America, but, on the other hand, it must also be borne in mind that 
many named by Ridgway are what are called subspecies, which were not 
recognized in the day of Linnaeus. 

In the time of Linnaeus there were few naturalists in the United States, 
but those were active; and that they approved of his methods is shown by a 
letter of Collin to Linnaeus, in which he says, "Your system I can tell you 
obtains much in America. Mr. Clayton and Dr. Golden at Albany are 
complete professors, as is Dr. Mitchell at Urbana, Va." If this seems a 
pitifully small number to us, it must be remembered that in those days 
naturalists were few in number, and natural objects studied but little; and 
twelve years later there were in all England but seven botanists who were fol- 
lowers of the Linnaean methods. Those were the good times when one man 
knew the plants and animals of the whole globe. Now a naturalist may 
devote his entire time to the study of one small group, and the names of other 
plants and animals are often as unfamiliar to him as they are to the average 

It is interesting, almost amusing, to see how little an idea Linnaeus and 
his contemporaries had of the number of the animals in the world, for their 
most liberal estimates were very far from the facts. And this lack of knowl- 
edge Linnaeus realized when he wrote at the end of his "Systema Naturae," 
"Ea qua scimus sunt pars minima eorum qua ignoramus." Thus Ray in 
1693, a short time before Linnaeus began his career, estimated that there 
were about twenty thousand animals, including insects, in the whole world; 
and this was a very liberal estimate, for he actually described less than four 

Now, Ray was what would be termed to-day a "lumper," and divided 
all living things into four great orders, insects, fishes, birds and beasts, 


the last including reptiles. The number of beasts he stated to be a hundred 
and fifty, adding his belief that "not many that are of any considerable big- 
ness in the known regions of the world have escaped the cognizance of the 
curious." The birds he considered might reach as many as five hundred. 
Contrast this with the more than twelve thousand species so far described. 
The number of insects he considered might possibly reach twenty thousand 
species, a long way from Sharp and Walsingham's estimate of two millions, 
or Riley's of ten millions. Nowadays this estimate of Ray provokes a 
smile, and yet we can find an example of much greater complacency shown 
by one of our noted scientific men of much more recent date; for Dr. Coues 
about 1880 thought that few mammals remained to be discovered in North 
America. How badly he was mistaken is shown by Dr. Allen's review in 
1894, showing that the number of recognized species had more than doubled 
in ten years, rising from 181 in 1880 to 369 in 1890; and since then many 
more have been described, not merely small creatures that to the ordinary 
observers are alike, but large animals like bears and mountain-sheep. 

It well illustrates the activity displayed by naturalists of that day to say 
that by 1758 the number of known mammals and reptiles had increased to 
334 and of birds to 790; the figures in the one case being an advance of 
a hundred per cent over those of Ray, and in the other of fifty per cent. 

How thoroughly the world is being ransacked for new animals, and how 
actively naturalists are engaged in their description, may be gathered from 
the following figures. Up to 1830, species to the number of 71,598 had 
been described, by 1881 the number had risen to 211,553, and by 1896 
to 366,000; more than 150,000 species having been described in fifteen 
years. And the vast and ever-growing host of living things the beasts 
of the field, the birds of the air, the fishes that are in the water about the 
earth, to say nothing of the myriad species of the plant world are each 
and all named in accordance with the method devised by Linnaeus two 
centuries ago. Linnaeus builded better than he knew, and his work has 
stood the test of time; and the methods he devised for classifying and 
naming animals are those in use now. His details may have been faulty, 
and the groups he considered as genera may have been divided and sub- 
divided, but his plan stands. 

Scores of animals known to Linnseus have been swept out of existence, 
and thousands that he never knew have been discovered; but the stimulus 
given by him to the study of nature remains unchecked, and to-day in 
many countries the members of learned societies have assembled, as we have 
gathered here, to do honor to the great Swedish naturalist. Sweden, indeed, 
chanced to be the birthplace of this great man, but genius is not fettered 
by time and space, belonging rather to all time and to the whole world. 


At the conclusion of Mr. Lucas's address the Glee Club sang a second 
selection, and then the evening exercises ended with an exhibition, by means 
of stereopticon views, of plants and animals known to Linnseus, in charge 
of Dr. A. J. Grout and Mr. Lucas. 

In the Borough of Manhattan the day was rounded out at the New 
York Aquarium, Battery Park, where the New York Zoological Society 
gave a reception to the Academy and the guests of the occasion. This 
function likewise commemorated the centennial anniversary of the erection 
of the building and gave the first view of the collections by night. A fea- 
ture of the reception was the exhibition of forms of marine life known to 


An important and highly interesting feature of the Linnteus celebration 
lay in the following documents contributed by sister societies in many parts 
of the world, and letters written by several of the Honorary Members of 
the New York Academy. Each is reproduced here in the language in 
which it was sent in. 

Kungl. Svenska Vetenskapsakadexnien, Stockholm. 

It is with great pleasure that the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has 
received in these days, from all parts of the world, the most gratifying testi- 
monies of the great admiration and esteem in which our first president, 
Carl von Linn6, is held by all those who love and study nature. Your invi- 
tation has also been accepted with great gratitude : it was, however, received 
so late that it was impossible to take any measures for participating in your 
celebration in such a way as would have been desirable to us. You have 
expressed your wishes that we should contribute an official document appre- 
ciative of the work of Linne. There is, however, no opportunity now to 
prepare such a document, and we must thus confine ourselves to a short 
statement elucidating our opinion. 

There were many great naturalists before Linne, if we count from Aris- 
toteles to Ray and Willughby. There was certainly a great amount of 
knowledge, also, concerning animals and plants; but there was no system, 
no scientific names or terms. The facts that were known in natural history 
before Linn6 were thus heaped without order, or with very little order, like 
a pile of bricks and stones at a building-place. Linne was the great architect 
who made the plan for the erecting of the building, the system; and he 
furnished at the same time the mortar the nomenclature for cementing 


together the stones and bricks. It may be admitted that more practical and 
more beautiful buildings have been constructed since that time in the scien- 
tific world; but he was and he remains the great master, who, with bril- 
liant genius and admirable skill, first taught us how to put in order and 
systematically arrange the material, and thus make a true science of natu- 
ral history. This has also been universally admitted; and the renowned 
British naturalist Pennant writes about this part of Linnets work, "He 
hath in all his classes given philosophy a new language; hath invented 
apt names, and taught the world a brevity, yet a fullness, of description 
unknown to past ages." 

Many persons not familiar with Linnets work have believed that Linne 
contented himself with describing the exterior of the objects in nature, and 
then named them. Nothing can be more erroneous; that is proved by 
the program or the "Methodus" which Linne published even in the first 
edition of "Systema Naturae." This "Methodus" is in its thirty-eight 
short paragraphs the fullest and richest program which any student of 
natural history has ever published. Referring to this we may aflSrin that no 
branch whatever of biological study was neglected or underrated by Linne". 
He grasped fully the importance of the study of anatomy, and he advised 
his scholars to dissect animals and also to make a frequent use of the magnify- 
ing glass. His ardent love of living nature made him an excellent biologist 
in the restricted sense of that word. 

Even if his greatest works were of a systematic and descriptive nature, 
it becomes evident to any one who has only a superficial knowledge of what 
Linne has written, that his genius extended with unbounded flight to cover 
much wider areas of philosophical speculation. Although he did not see it 
in the light of the theory of evolution, it was indeed far too early for that, 
the general struggle for existence, as well as the idea of sexual selection, was 
well known to him. And many other problems of modern times did he 
touch. Let us only recall the fact that to the pious and pure mind of this 
great naturalist there was no objection to place homo sapiens as the first 
link in the continuous chain of organisms. 

His works may shine with everlasting brightness through all ages, as 
long as mankind devotes itself to the study of nature. His name is cere 
perennius, but this Academy of Sciences and the whole people of Sweden 
feel deeply and are gratefully touched by the honor which now is bestowed 
upon our great compatriot, when his name is given to a monumental bridge 
connecting the Botanical Garden and the Zoological Park in New York. 



Kungl. Svenska Vetenskapsakademien, Upsala. 

The Royal Society of Sciences at Upsala has had the honor and the 
pleasure of receiving your letter, informing them of the impressive manner 
in which the memory of their great countryman, Carl von Linne", will be 
celebrated in the metropolis of the United States. 

To every Swede, and especially to our Society, whose honor it is to count 
Linn6 as the greatest ornament of its ranks, it is highly gratifying to see that 
the memory of the man whom all the world recognizes as princeps botani- 
corum, is also beyond the Atlantic held so sacred that the two hundredth 
anniversary of his birth will be celebrated there with the same love and 
reverence as in his own country. And we fully appreciate the delicate 
courtesy which has led you to immortalize his name among you by dedicat- 
ing to him the beautiful bridge which unites your Botanical Garden with 
the Zoological Park. 

The necessity of answering your honored letter without delay renders it 
impossible for the Royal Society of Sciences to enter more fully on the epoch- 
making significance of the great Linn6's life and work. Nor do we consider 
it necessary for us to do so, least of all in relation to your renowned Academy, 
which takes the lead in the grand scientific evolution of America. Do we 
not both realize that LirmS's great genius has laid the foundations on which 
botanical science goes on building this very day? We both realize the 
unceasing debt of gratitude which both hemispheres owe to his immortal 
name. And so on both sides of the Atlantic we celebrate with deep-felt 
enthusiasm the two hundredth anniversary of his birth. 

We offer you our best wishes on the memorable day, and congratulate 
you on your successful work in the immense field of learning. 

J. A. EKMAN, Archbishop of Sweden, 

N. C. DUNR, Honorary Secretary. 

Professor Hans Rensch, Kristiania, Norway. 
(Honorary Member of the Academy.) 

In my working-room at the Geological Survey of Norway for many 
years I have had only one portrait hanging, that of Linnaeus. 1 regard 
him as the household spirit of every good naturalist. 


The Geological Commission of Finland. 

On behalf of the Geological Commission of Finland, we desire first of 
all to express our high appreciation of the honor rendered us in inviting the 
Commission to take part in the celebration, by the New York Academy, 
of the two hundredth anniversary of Carl von Linne". 

We are proud to think that we have some right to reckon this great 
memory among our own, because Finland in Linnets time was united to 
Sweden; and a large number of us Finlanders are still, by language and 
descent, connected with that land. Among his disciples were also several 
of our countrymen; and the interest which ever since that period has existed 
here for the study of botany, and also of zoology, we regard as a direct 
inheritance from Linnets time. Not only naturalists ex professo have taken 
part in the investigation of the flora and fauna of our country, but also 
physicians, clergymen, government officials and the general public, who 
have, ever since Linne' s days, constantly and with zealous eagerness lent 
their aid to the augmentation of our store of knowledge in things pertaining 
to natural science. 

By his travels, among the first which were undertaken for a purely 
scientific purpose, Linn6 has also given an example to the numerous explorers 
who since his time have gone out from northern lands among those born 
in Finland we may mention Laxman the explorer of Siberia, Castren the 
linguist, and Baron A. E. Nordenskiold, the geologist, and discoverer of the 
Northeast passage and to all those who, after Linnets time, have united 
the courage and energy of the pioneer with scientific thoroughness. 

We geologists remember in especial that Linne" who had very correct 
ideas of the geological sequence among the silurian rocks of Sweden and 
the importance of fossils, and whose conception of the geological importance 
of the deluge was for his time unusually free from bias can be reckoned 
among the early pioneers of geology and as a predecessor of the great natu- 
ralists who somewhat later, in Scotland and Saxony, laid the foundation- 
stones of scientific geology. He had a notion of the immense length of 
geological time, and expressed opinions which contained the germ of the 
actualistic doctrine that afterwards proved so fruitful for our science. 

It has been the mission of the Anglo-Saxon nations to work out this 
doctrine and to build up on this basis the science of geology. When in our 
days we Northerners see without jealousy the hegemony in natural science 
pass over to the great nations which have continents for their field of re- 
search, we still remember with pride that it was at one time held by the 
little nation to which Linne" belonged, and see in the festival with which 


your honored society celebrates the two hundredth anniversary of his birth a 
recognition that all scientific exploration which is carried on in an unpreju- 
diced spirit of order and truth is a work in the spirit of Linne. 

Remembering the bond which thus connects your great nation with the 
small countries of northern Europe, we wish especially to recall to you one 
of Linne's disciples, the explorer Pehr Kalm, professor of botany at the 
University of Abo in Finland. He was very highly esteemed by his great 
teacher. In Limit's list of the naturalists of his time, in which each one 
was distinguished w T ith a certain rank, Linne himself was general, and Kalm 
had the rank of major. Commissioned by the Royal Swedish Academy 
of Sciences, Kalm, as is well known, traveled far into North America, and 
afterwards published an uncommonly accurate and minute account of his 
observations, which was translated into several languages. He penetrated 
into what was then considered the Far West, to the Lake of Ontario; and 
it was through his letters to Benjamin Franklin, in which Kalm with his 
usual minuteness described the Falls of Niagara, that this great wonder of 
nature first became more generally known. 

What a lapse of time has passed since that visit of the disciple of Linne" 
to North America ! a time measured more properly by the wonderful 
development of civilization than by the number of years that have gone by. 
Over this vast continent, where then were forests and prairies, the abodes of 
the wild Indian, has the white man now built his homes, and it is strewn 
with schools in which the children learn to designate the plants and animals 
with the names given them by Linne. Everywhere there are universities 
in which the study of natural science is carried on with the aid of means 
and appliances wiiich Linne never could have dreamed of. Where Kalm, 
at the mouth of the Hudson River, found a town which he says was then 
"about half as big again as Gothenburg in Sweden," lies now one of the 
greatest cities of the world; and in this city the two hundredth anniversary 
of Linne is now celebrated in a way that shows that his memory is as much 
honored there as in his fatherland. 

What a proof of his greatness, what a guaranty that he will forever be 
regarded as one of the master-minds of mankind ! 



Senaat der Rijks-Universiteit te Leiden. 

The Leiden University Senate has the honor to present its congratula- 
tions to the New York Academy of Sciences on the occasion of the commem- 


oration festivities celebrating the two hundredth anniversary of the birth 
of Carl von Linne". The whole scientific world unites in grateful veneration 
of an admirable scholar, whose reputation is least of all lost in the land 
where he spent three of the most fruitful years of his life. Our Senate ex- 
presses its feelings of cordial sympathy with the way in which the New York 
Academy of Sciences intends to celebrate the anniversary of his birth by 
the erection of an architectural monument symbolizing the work of a man 
whose genius embraced the two realms of living nature. 
For the Senate 

W. NOLEN, Rector Magnificat. 

H. P. WIJSMAN, Secretary. 

Professor A. A. W. Hubrecht, University of Utrecht. 
(Honorary Member of the Academy.) 

The great Swede whose birth now two hundred years ago will be 
commemorated all over the world on May 23, passed many years of his life 
in Holland. It is thus natural that many local reminiscences are connected 
with his name in different parts of this country. If we allow our thoughts 
to go back for more than a century and a half, we can imagine Linnaeus 
roaming about on his botanical excursions over those same fields between 
's Graveland and Hilversum where Hugo de Vrics lately encountered an 
emigrant from the United States (CEnotkera lamarckiana) that was to be- 
come a starting-point for new and important speculations about the species 

The foundations for an answer to that problem were laid in a quite mas- 
terly manner by Linnseus. In the latter half of the nineteenth century we 
have, however, been accustomed, after reading Darwin's works, to consider 
the problem as non-existing; species, apparently, being in slow and imper- 
ceptible continuity. 

Hugo de Vries has again limited species between the occurrence of two 
mutations, each species thus being a real entity in time and in space. This 
does not prevent de Vries from being at the same time one of the stanchest 
disciples of Darwin, in whose steps he is treading. 

Linnaeus's species differ from de Vries's in that they are the primary 
network between the meshes of which de Vries has spun out the lacework 
of the mutation theory. 

The new generations thus attempt to continue Linnaeus's and Darwin's 
work, and unite in paying homage to the memory of the founder of the 
" Systema Naturae." 


L' Academic de Medecine de Paris. 

L' Academic de Medecine de Paris est heureuse de repondre a I'invitation 
qu'elle a reue de 1' Academic des Sciences de New- York, a 1'occasion du 
deuxieme centenaire de la naissance de Linne. Elle s'associe cordialement 
aux hommages rendus a la memoire de 1'illustre naturaliste par les corps 
savants de la grande cit6 americaine. 

Tout a & dit sur 1'ceuvre de Linne" et sur la revolution qu'il a ope"r6e 
dans les sciences naturelles. Au milieu de la confusion et de I'obscurit6 
qui re"gnaient avant lui, il a su, le premier, degager et rendre f6condes les 
ide"es generates eparses dans les Merits de ses devanciers; part out il a porte 
1'ordre, la clarte et des reformes heureuses. 

Observateur incomparable, a 1'amour de la v^rite, il joignait une imagi- 
nation vive, un esprit fertile et sagace, 1'expression verbale pittoresque et 
le sentiment profond des choses de la nature. Ses e"crits occupent depuis 
longtemps la premiere place dans 1'estime des savants, et Ton se demande, 
en voyant leur prodigieuse etendue, ce qui doit le plus etonner, du nombre 
de ces ouvrages ou de 1' importance de chacun d'eux. 

Mais, de tous les titres de Linne" a la reconnaissance de la poste'rite', le 
plus beau est sans contredit celui de fondateur de cette langue scientifique 
nouvelle, la nomenclature binaire, qui constitue le plus grand progres 
accompli dans les sciences naturelles au dix-huitieme siecle. A la prolixit 
confuse des descriptions anterieures, il substituait un langage net et precis, 
en introduisant 1' usage de designer les tres par un nom de genre, qui les 
unit, et par un nom d'espece, qui les distingue. La nomenclature linnenne 
s'est Etendue a toutes les branches de 1'histoire naturelle; elle en a prodi- 
gieusement facility I'&ude en fournissant une langue commune aux savants 
de tous les pays. 

Le systeme de classification e"tabli par Linn6 n'a pas moins contribu6 
aux progres de la botanique pendant pres d'un siecle. Dans ce cadre 
artificiel, les plantes nouvelles se rangeaient aisment d'apres un petit nombre 
de caracteres emprunt6s a la fleur et judicieusement choisis. Des lors 
l'6tude des v^g^taux devint accessible a la multitude, les rccherchcs scicnti- 
fiqucs se multiplierent dans toutes les parties du globe avec une activite" 

Toutcfois, 1'esprit philosophique du grand naturaliste ne pouvait manquer 
de saisir toute 1'importance d'une m^thode plus parfaite, et, s'il ne lui a pas 
e"t6 donn^ de la raliser lui-m^me, on peut dire du moins qu'il en a &e le 
plus ardent promoteur et que mil, plus que lui, n'a contribue" a 1'avenement 
de la grande reforme op^ree plus tard par Laurent de Jussieu. 


Professeur de me"decine, Linne s'est efforce de diriger 1'etude de la 
botanique vers les applications a 1'art de guerir. II a cu Ic nitrite de formulcr 
nettement le principe qui devait servir de guide a la recherche des proprietes 
m&licamenteuses des plantes, principe fonde sur les analogies des caracteres 
botaniques et des caracteres chimiques des ve'ge'taux. Si les successeurs 
de Linne ont parfois exag6re la portee de la theorie, elle n'en a pas moins 
ouvert une voie fe"conde aux recherches ulterieures. 

L'ancienne Societe" Royale de Mdecine de Paris, dont notre Compagnie 
a recueilli I'hSritage, a compte" jadis 1'illustre professeur d'Upsal au nombre 
de ses Associes Strangers. L'Academie de Medecine de Paris est done 
particulirement qualifiee pour cele"brer avec vous 1'anniversaire du grand 
naturaliste suedois. Ellc remercie 1' Academic des Sciences de New- York 
de 1'avoir con vice a. cette commemoration, qui lui pennet d'exp rimer ses 
sentiments d'admiration et de reconnaissance pour le savant dont 1'ceuvre 
ge"niale a projete" sur le monde une si vive et si puissante lumiere que I'^clat 
n'en est pas encore affaibli. 

ARM AND GAUTIER, Le President. 
JACCOUD, Le Secretaire perpetuel. 

Universit de Lyon. 

Le Conseil de rUniversite" de Lyon est heureux de s'associer moralement 
au deuxieme centenaire de la naissance de 1'illustre naturaliste Sue"dois 
Charles Linne. II addresse a cette occasion 1'hommage de son admiration 
profonde pour le createur de la premiere classification scientifique des regnes 
animal et ve'ge'tal; pour 1'inventeur de la nomenclature binominale qui a 
introduit une si lumineuse clarte dans le chaos jusque la obscur de la nomen- 
clature biologique; pour I'immortel auteur du " Systema Naturae" qui est le 
premier inventaire universel des richesses du monde anime". 

II envoie en mme temps a 1' Academic des Sciences de New- York 
1'expression de sa gratitude la plus cordiale pour Tamable pensee qu'eile 
a eue d'associer 1'Universite de Lyon a cette fete de la Science Internationale. 

T. JOUBIN, Le Recteur, 

President du Conseil de 1'Universite. 

Societ6 des Amis des Sciences Naturelles de Rouen. 

La Soci6t6 des Amis des Sciences naturelles de Rouen (France) a 1'hon- 
neur d'exprimer a 1'illustre Academic des Sciences de New York sa vive 


satisfaction de savoir qu'un pont de cette admirable ville sera d6die a 
rimmortel Linne, dont les travaux geniaux constituent la base de la taxi- 
nomie, et dont le nom sera perpetue" a jamais par les innombrables especes 
animales et veg&ales qu'il a decrites. 

La Societe" des Amis des Sciences naturelles de Rouen prie 1'illustre 
Academic des Sciences de New York d'agreer 1'hommage de sa respectueuse 
admiration, joint a 1'assurance de ses meilleurs sentiments de confraternity. 

SocietS d'Histoire Naturelle de Toulouse. 


"Tibi suaveo dsedala tellus 
Summittit flores." LUCRECE, De Natura Rerum. 

C'est a vous, divin naturaliste, que 1'univers entier presents en ce jour ses 
plus belles fleurs. 

Nous saluerons tout d'abord le savant qui d'un trait de son puissant 
ge"nie, saisit la structure intime des vegetal. Lui aussi a eu la gloire d'ouvrir 
un des sanctuaires de la nature et de s'initier le premier a quelques-uns de 
ses secrets. 

"Effringere ut arcta 
Naturae primus poetarum claustra cupiret." LTJCUECE. 

Avant Linn6 le vegetal d'etait qu'un vulgaire objet d' admiration, 1' element 
& la fois rejouissant et decoratif du paysage. Mais le g6nie du botaniste 
que nous fetons eut y lire tout un monde nouveau, et de la comparaison de ce 
monde avec celui des animaux sut brillamment degager la nation de hie- 
rarchic entre les deux regnes, entre le vegetal et 1'animal. Alors se dessina 
en quelque sorte le premier anneau, la trame primordiale qui devait bientdt 
amener 1'esprit de l'homme a se rcprescnter une chaine complete des etres. 
Reconnaissons done en Linne un anc&rc de Darwin. 

Mais le regne ve'g&al s'est en quelque sorte anime sous le regard de ce 
scrutateur amoureux de la nature. Qu'est ce en effet pour Linn6 que cette 
riante parure que nous nous plaisons a appeler corolle de la fleur? Tout 
simplement le lit nuptial des organes sexuels, ceux qui reproduiront 1'espece. 
Et que seront, examines attentivement, chacun de ces derniers organes, 
tant male que femelle, sinon un renduirent, une e"bauche un "caneoas" de 
celui de 1'animal, comme a fait si bien ressortir le physiologiste Bichat? 
C'est cette decouverte qui constitue le trait original et saillant entre tous, 
le trait de gnie, repetons le, de 1'oeuvre de Linne. Derriere l'homme de 
g6nie nous devons admirer le philosophe. 


Aussitdt que Linn cut cue bien prfeente dans son esprit la continuity de 
la chatne, disons mieux de I'e'chelle des etres vivants avec leur lois generales 
communes aux deux regnes & la fois, il cut aussi toutes desporees d'une 
fa?on tres reguliere les bases d'une classification des v6getaux. II les 
rtjpartit en vingt quatre categories, basees toutes sur les rapports des organes 
males et des organes femelles dans une mme fleur ou dans des fleurs se'parees, 
les organes sont respectivcment appeles les "maris et les feinmes" par 
Linn6. Signalons a titre de curiosite": 

La classe xiv, Didynamie. Deux puissances quatre mans dont deux 
plus grands et deux plus petits. 

La classe xxi, Moncecie. Une seule maison: les maris habitent avec 
les femmes dans des lits diflferents (dans la meme maison). 

La classe xxii, Dioecie. Les maris habitent des domiciles et des lits 

La classe xxiii, Polygamie. Plusieurs noces : les maris habitent dans 
des lits distincts avec des epouses legitimes et des concubines. 

La classe xxiv, Cryptogamie. Noces cachets, les noces sont celebrees 
clandestinement . 

Cette thebrie, toute ge"niale qu'clle etait, n'6tait pas cependant destinee 
a subsister. Elle n'en demeurere pas moins comme le plus beau monument 
de l'&ge d'or de la botanique. Aussi le chemin etait fraye dans le domaine 
veg&al: la notion de la classification allait devenir un chapitre important 
des Etudes philosophiques, et, grace a une plus complete connaissance de la 
nature, la philosophic elle mme allait prendre un nouvel essor, agrandir, 
transforme son domaine, descendre des hauteurs in&aphysiques a des donn6es 
plus positives. Et cela jusques au jour ou le progres incessant des sciences 
naturelles viendrait introduire une nouvelle idee g^niale, grace a laquelle 
les deux regnes auraient des tendances a la confondu en un seul: par voie 
de progres nous avons nomme cette evolution dont Linn6 avait jete les 
premiers fondaments. Comme il etait loin, quand il ecrivait la Philosophia 
Botanica de pouvoir entrevoir seulement la grandeur future de l'difice 
dont il jetait las assises! Quelle est enfin 1'epithete qui convient a Linn6 au 
milieu de ce que Ton pourrait appeler le "chosur des botanistes?" 

Un savant Suisse, Rueper, s'est plu a caracteriser chacun des grands 
historiens du regne v^g^tal. II nous represente le trfo subtil Adanson. 
Le tres ingenieux Bernard de Jussieu, les 6minents Robert Brown et De 
Candolle, quant a Linne", il a sa place surSminente, c'est le divin Linn6, 
divers Linnaeus! Le divin Linn6! nous lui maintiendrons ce sublime titre, 
puisque ce fut un des privileges surhumains pour ainsi dire, doue" des 
lumieres tout a fait superieurs, qui sert ouvrir une des portes d'un sanc- 
tuairo de la nature, introduisent aussi a sa suite dans ce domaine reput6 


inaccessible jusques a lui toute une legion d'e'minents travailleurs destines 
a eu explorer les recours et a continuer son ceuvre ! 

Le divin LinnS! n'avait-il pas en effet comme profonde"ment gravee dans 
tout son etre 1'empreinte de cette Divinite" qu'il ne perdit jamais de vue ? 
ne considerait il pas 1'oeuvre qu'il avait accompli dans la science comme le 
plus bel hommage qu'il fut capable de lui rendre quelques unes de ses pages 
redisent plusieurs fois le nom du Cre'ateur de tous les etres. Comme nous 
regrettons de n'avoir pu retrouver cette priere, si sublime dans sa brevit6, 
dans laquelle il exprime a 1'auteur de la nature sa reconnaissance eternelle 
pour la joie qu'il ressent de 1'ceuvre qu'il lui a permis d'accompli! Bornons 
nous a mentionner les invocations qui terminent un de ses chapitres: 

"O Jehovah, quam ampla sunt opera tua! 
Quam ea omnia in sapientia fecisti! 
Quam plena est terra possessione tua!" 

Ce sont les propres accents de David, au psaume 103, mais sur un ton plus 

Saluons en terminant 1'heureuse patrie de Linn6, la Suede. La race des 
g6nies, si brillamment inaugure"e par le botaniste dont nous fetons aujourd'hui 
1'anniversaire deux fois seculaire de la naissancc, cette race disons nous, ne 
parait pas volontaire s'epuiseren Scandinavie. Qu'il nous suffire de nommer 
un contemporain, le celebre chimiste Arrhenius, qui semble lui aussi, par sa 
belle theorie des ions, avoir revolutionn6 a la fois le monde chimique et le 
monde electrique, preparant ainsi une nouvelle voie aux de"couvertes indus- 
trielles de 1'avenir. L'ceuvre de Linne" 6tait dans le regne vegetal. Arrhe"- 
nius a roula la tente dans un troisieme regne, celui dont toute vie est exclue'; 
les secrets qu'il croit en ou arraches a la nature sont d'un ordre encore plus 
intime et plus mysterieux que ceux que lui avaient derobes le grand botaniste. 
Comme consequence des travaux de ces deux grands hommes, la science 
peut dire aujourd'hui avec plus de raison que le hero de Lucrecc : II y a plus 
bien de myste'rieuse dans la nature: nous avons triomphe de toutes les 
barriferes, et nous avons conquis la notion du degre de puissance qu'a Ste" 
delimit^ a chaque e"tre et de la borne qu'il ne peut de"passer. 

"Unde refert nobis victor quid ponit oreri, 
Quid nequeat, finita potestas denique eusque 
Quanam ut ratione atque alte terminus hoarens." 

LUCRECE, De Natura Rerum. 

H. DE LASTEE, Bibliothecaire. 


Professor Charles Barrois, University of Lille. 
(Honorary Member of the Academy.) 

C'est un tres doux sentiment pour les savants de la vieille Europe de 
vivre un jour en pleine communion d'idees avec les savants de la jeune 
Amerique, pour jeter le souvenir d'un maitre commun, d'un bienfaiteur de 
la science. L'histoire, les nations, I'homme ont bien evolue depuis le jour 
de Linn; le respect dd a son nom demeure, et s'en va grandissant. Puisse 
son exemple faire des emules nombreux dans votre grand pays, qui de nos 
jours rend de si eminents services a la cause de la science. 

Kaiserliche Leopoldinisch-Carolinische Deutsche Akademie der 
Naturforscher, Halle A.S. 

Der New York Academy of Sciences entbietet die Kaiserliche Leopol- 
dinisch-Carolinische Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher zu der Feier des 
200-Geburtstages von KARL VON LINNE einen Gruss, da sie sich eines 
weiss mit derselben in dem Bestreben den grossen schwedischen Natur- 
forscher zu ehren. War doch unsere Akademie die erste wissenschaftliche 
Korperschaft, welche bereits 1736 den jungen Linnaeus in ihre Mitte 
aufnahm und ihm den glanzvollen Beinamen eines Dioskorides Se- 
cundus beilegte. Wohl auf keine anderen Geistesheroen kann das stolze 
Wort: Deus creavit, Linnaeus disposuit auch nur annahernd angewcndet 
werdcn. So unscheinbar die Linnaeus borealis ist, umso grosser steht 
Linn6 als Naturforscher da. Aber nicht nur als Botaniker und Zoologe 
erwarb der Jubilar unsterblichen Ruhm, auch in der Medizin leistete er fiir 
die damalige Zeit in der Materia Medica wie der Diatetik Hervorragendes 
und war wohl derjenige, welcher in Schweden fiir die pathologische Ana- 
tomic als bahnbrechend anzusehen ist, da er die Leichensektionen daselbst 

Der New York Academy of Sciences gestatten wir uns anbei den Abdruck 
eines Aufsatzes zu iiberreichen, welcher zu Ehren von Karl von Linne in 
der Leopoldina soeben erschien. 

A. WANGERIN, Prasident. 

ROTH, Bibliothekar. 


Geh. Bat Professor Dr. H. Rosenbusch, University, Heidelberg. 

{Honorary Member of the Academy.) 

. . . Leider ist es mir bei der Fiille von Arbeit, die vor mir liegt, nicht 
moglich, Ihrem \Viinsche [for a document to be read at the Bicentenary] zu 
entsprechen, aber Sie diirfen iiberzeugt sein, dass meine Gedanken und 
Wiinsche am 23 Mai bei Ihnen in New York sein werden. Moge Ihr Fest 
den schonsten Verlauf nehmen und ein freundlicher Stern iiber der schonen 
Briicke walten, die den Namen eines der bedeutsamsten Begriinder der 
Natunvissenschaften tragen soil. 

Ihre Nation gibt der ganzen Welt ein nachahmungswiirdiges Beispiel, 
indem sie ein stolzes Werk der modernen Technik nach einem Forscher 
benennt, dessen ganzes Leben dem hochsten menschlichen Gute, der 
Wissenschaft, geweiht war. 

Regia Societas Scientiarum Bohemica, Prague. 

The Royal Bohemian Society of Sciences in Prague, fully appreciating 
the importance of celebrating the two hundredth anniversary of Carl von 
Linne's birth by the New York Academy of Sciences, is glad to join the 
sister institutions in honoring this great naturalist, whose efforts in the first 
splendid achievements and developments of biology are of perpetual value. 

"When, in the beginning of modern times, in the multitude of known and 
newly discovered organic forms, there was a complete chaos to be feared 
instead of an exact distinction of them, it was the genius of Linn6 which 
arranged the masses of raw material into the scientific edifice of a strictly 
logical system. Linne's epochal "Systema Naturae" laid the foundation for 
all future systematics of animals and plants. 

Introducing the descriptive method and terminology, establishing a clear 
definition of each species in its genus, order and class, Linne gained a firm 
basis for an exact deduction of organic forms. It was Linne" who at the 
same time united the analytical and synthetical tendencies of his predecessors 
into an efficient discipline. 

Linne's method has facilitated the knowledge of the flora and fauna of 
whole territories, and we have to thank this method that also in Bohemia 
very early efforts for a systematical analysis of the organic world have been 
brought to full efficiency. 

The Royal Bohemian Society of Sciences, the oldest center of scientific 


efforts in Austria, has from the very beginning of her existence founded her 
work on Linnets teaching, and has in progress of time, with the increasing 
numbers of successful scientists amongst her members, continually contrib- 
uted to the systematical knowledge of organic life in Bohemia. We need 
only point out the old classical systematicians of zoology and botany, 
M. E. Bloch, Von Stein, K P. Presl, Lad. Celakovsky, and others who 
enriched the publications of the Royal Bohemian Society of Sciences in the 
spirit of Linne\ 

And the researches of modern times, so important for the study of organic 
life in the enormous mass of its zoological and botanical forms, though they 
are far advanced in their ideas and methods, still must always gratefully 
remember the invaluable deserts of the great Linn6 for the foundation and 
development of biology. 

For the Royal Bohemian Society of Sciences : 

K. VRBA, President. 

DR. V. E. MOUREK, General Secretary. 

F. VEJDOVSKY, Secretary of the Class for 

Mathematical and Natural Sciences. 

La Societ6 de Physique et d'Histoire Naturelle de Geneve, Suisse. 

La Soci&e de Physique et d'Histoire naturelle de Geneve s'associe de 
grand cceur a la manifestation que font les Soci&es Amencaines pour 
celSbrer le bi-centenaire de Linn6. 

Geneve, plus que toute autre, s'y associe avec joie: ses naturalistes tels 
que les Vaucher, les de Candolle, les de Saussure ont toujours hautement 
appre'cie' 1'oeuvre du grand Sue"dois, et leurs descendants ne peuvent que 
suivre leurs traces et applaudir a tout ce qui pourra perp&uer la m&noire 
de ce savant. 

Notre Socie"t6 adresse done des vceux chaleureux pour le succes de la 
manifestation ame>icaine, qui sera digne de celui qui a laisse" une trace si 
profonde dans les sciences naturelles. 

A. BRUN, President. 

Specula Vaticana, Rome. 

The Specula Vaticana heartily joins in your celebration of the two hun- 
dredth anniversary of the birth of Carl von LinnS. 

The astronomers of the Specula recognize a close relation between their 


own realm and that of the distinguished Swedish naturalist, in that stars 
and flowers are called the " eyes of the heavens " and the "eyes of the field," 
which, with the eyes of the child, are numbered among the most precious 
gifts of the Creator. 

We rejoice with you that Linne" has unfolded to us the beauties and 
riches of the eyes of the field, which, no less than those of the heavens, show 
forth the glory of God. 

JOHN G. HAGEN, S.J., Director. 

Reale Osservatorio di Palermo, Italia. 

Poiche in occasione del secondo centanario della nascita di Carlo Linneo, 
che cotesta Accademia celebrera il 23 corrente, la S. V. Illma mi ha gentil- 
mente invitato a contribute un documento ufficiale apprerzante 1'opera del 
Naturalista Svedese, io, non avendo una competenza sufficiente per dire 
cosa degna di un cosi eminente Scienrato in una ricorrenza cosi solenne, mi 
sono rivolto per aiuto al mio illustre collega Prof. A. Borzi, direttore del R. 
Giardino Botanico e Coloniale di Palermo, il quale mi ha risposto con la 
lettera che qui Le hascrivo. 

"E'tanto difficile dire qualche cosa di nuovo su Carlo Linneo che io mi 
trovo imbarazzato a rispondere alia sua domanda. Da quasi due secoli 
tutte la vita di questo sommo Naturalista e stata indagata in ogni piu minuta 
particolarita, tutte le sue opere studiate con tanta profondita di dottrina, 
che io non saprei che cosa dire. Certamente di Linneo si pud affermare 
che nessun botanico o naturalista raggiunse a cosi alta fama come Lui: 
non v'e persona mediocremente colta che non rammenti il nome di Carlo 
Linneo, mentre di tanti e tanti altri insigni naturalist! il ricordo non ha 
vareato cosi vasti confini. II piu grande merito di Linneo, secondo me, 
non consiste rolamente nello avere riformato e piantato su basi incrollabili 
la sistematica vegetale, ma sopra tutto quello di aver tracciato le linee 
fondamentali della Botanica Scientifica moderna divinandone meraviglio- 
samente i concetti. Basta leggere il piccolo libro intitolato " Philosophia 
botanica " per convincersene. 

"Forse potra far piarere all' Accademia de New York il comunicarle un 
documento inedito curiosissimo che interessa la storia del nostro Istituto 
Botanico a proposito di Carlo Linneo. Quando nel 1792 si fondo 1'Orto 
Botanico di Palermo fu eretta una statua in onore del sommo botanico 
svedese. Lo scultore fu Vitale Zuccio, che la modello in istucco il doppio 
del naturale. Questa statua fu copiata da un ritratto di Linneo, dal Linneo 
stesso giudicato il piu somigliante e dovuto al pittore Roslins. II Zuccio, 


scultore palermitano, non ebbe la occasione di vedere questa pittura, ma 
semplicemente una incisione eseguita dall' artista Bervic nel 1779. Im- 
portante pero e il fatto che la prima statua eretta in onore di Linneo fu la 
nostra, mentre il primo ricordo marmoreo (un merzo busto) dell' insigne 
botanico, che si conosca, e quello che eresse il giardino delle piante di Parigi 
il 1790. La patria di Linneo ebbe al 1820 la prima statua dell' immortale 
suo figlio." 

lo mi un pregio di mandare a Lei una fotografua della statua di Linneo 
di cui ha partato il Prof. Borzi. 

F. ANGELITTI, Direttore. 

Real Academia de Ciencias Exactas, Fisicas y Naturales de Madrid. 

La Real Academia de Ciencias exactas, flsicas y naturales de Madrid 
estima como honrosa distincion el convite, que esa ilustre Academia le 
dirige, para contribuir a la celebracion del segundo centenario del nacimiento 
de Carlos Linneo. 

Gustosfsima se asocia a las solemnidades con que se festeje la veneranda 
memoria del naturalista, que, antes y mejor que otro alguno, supo imprimir 
6rden, metodo y sistema al estudio y conocimiento de los seres naturales, 
dotando a la ciencia de una nomenclatura y de una nocion de las especies, 
base de todas las descripciones y agrupaciones de los seres vivos, posterior- 
mente aceptadas. 

Espana se complace tanto mas vivamente en la exaltacion de la obra del 
sapientisimo maestro sueco, cuanto que por intermedio de un discipulo 
suyo estuvo con 61 en constante comunicacion mientras vivio. 

Fenga pues, la Academia de Ciencias de Nueva York por presente en 
espfritu la Real Academia de Ciencias exactas, fisicas y naturales de 
Madrid, en todos los actos, con que el 23 de Mayo glorifique a Linneo. 
JOSE ECHEGARAY, El Presidente. 

Royal Cornwall Polytechnic Society, Falmouth, England. 

To the members of the New York Academy of Sciences and assembled 
guests, on the occasion of the celebration of the bi-centenary of the birth 
of Carl Von Linne, the members of the Royal Cornwall Polytechnic Society 
(England) send greetings. 


As the parent of all societies calling themselves by the name Polytechnic, 
and having from its birth, in 1832, consistently adhered to the purpose of 
its founders, viz., the encouragement of science, as well as the fine and 
industrial arts, the Royal Cornwall Polytechnic Society offers its congratu- 
lations to its fellow-workers in the domain of science in the great city of New 
York, on the practical and comprehensive character of the commemorative 
exercises which their enterprise and wisdom have projected for the interesting 
occasion falling on May 23 next. It trusts nothing will occur to prevent 
each function from realization in a manner befitting the memory of so great 
a benefactor to natural science, and fully sustaining the prestige of one of the 
foremost of the learned societies in America. 

"While leaving it to societies of wider renown to express the world's 
indebtedness and gratitude to Carl von Linne, who has been truly styled 
"the father of modern systematic natural history," and who was the founder 
of the now universally adopted binominal system of scientific nomenclature, 
the Royal Cornwall Polytechnic Society cannot, on this historic occasion, 
refrain from recording its own appreciation of the work accomplished by 
one who, though a distinguished son of Sweden, belongs, by virtue of his 
brilliant achievements, to every land and people. 

The careful and far-reaching character of the investigations of Carl 
von Linne probably stand without parallel in the annals of science. Sur- 
rounded in early life by conditions which would have deterred most men, 
genius and a whole-hearted enthusiasm for the pursuit of knowledge in a 
direction where he was destined subsequently to hold a position which, 
after the lapse of two hundred years, is still unique, his clear insight, added 
to his almost incomparable faculty for dealing with vast accumulations of 
material, enabled him, after years of constant devotion to his self-imposed 
task, to evolve cosmos out of chaos. The foundation which he laid for the 
determination of genera and species was the soundest that science had been 
invited to adopt, and on it succeeding generations have reared a noble 

What the New York Academy of Sciences has been able to accomplish, 
what the Royal Cornwall Polytechnic Society has done for the encourage- 
ment of the many branches of natural science, what is being done by kin- 
dred societies all the world over, has been made possible through the new 
era which was ushered in by the publication of the numerous erudite works 
from the pen of him to whom all nations are now paying homage. 

To-day we think of the student whose indomitable courage enabled him 
to triumph over difficulties of the most trying kind, and to fill his appointed 
niche in human affairs; of the man whose life was so devout that his first 
sight of an English furze-bush, arrayed in all its golden splendor, was to 


him fitting occasion for expressing gratitude to God; of the distinguished 
scientist on whom the world's greatest prizes had been freely showered, 
selecting one of the most unobtrusive of plants to perpetuate his own name. 
After two hundred years, Carl von Linne" enters into full possession of his 
own well-earned estate, an estate fixed deep and indelibly in the heart and 
affections of every student of nature. 

JOHN D. ENYS, President. 

E. W. NEWTON, Secretary. 

The Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, Manchester, England. 

The Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society willingly joins with 
the New York Academy of Sciences in its commemoration of the two hun- 
dredth anniversary of the birth of the illustrious Linnfeus. 

His profound insight into the affinities and disresemblances of organized 
beings; his vivid differentiation of natural groups; his pithy, crisp charac- 
terization of orders, genera and species; and his binomial principle of nomen- 
clature, all exercised a profoundly stimulating influence upon the progress 
of biological science. 

Nor must the personal merits of the man pass unrecognized. His acknowl- 
edgment of the work of his predecessors, his self-sacrificing labors, the en- 
thusiasm with which he inspired his students, and his remarkable humility 
so fittingly commemorated in the Linncea borealis are qualities which 
provoke the admiration of naturalists, alike in the hemisphere in which he 
worked and in the hemisphere in which this commemoration is being held. 
HAROLD B. DIXON, President. 
FRANCIS JONES, 1 Honorary 


Professor James Geikie, University of Edinburgh. 

(Honorary Member of the Academy.) 

I deem it a high honor to be invited to place a little stone on the ever- 
increasing, cairn raised by lovers of science all the world over in memory 
of Carl von Linn. The distinguished Swedish naturalist has made a name 
for himself that can never die. Admirable as an exact observer and care- 
ful collator of evidence, and no less admirable as a generalizer, he is an 
ensample to every sincere student of nature. Before this bright genius 


appeared, the study of natural science was in a more or less chaotic state. 
Doubtless much knowledge of living things had been acquired before his 
time, but hitherto that knowledge had not been systematized. It was 
reserved for Linn6 not only greatly to increase the stores of learning, but to 
indicate how it was possible to group and classify the multitudinous forms 
of life so as to show that all formed part of one grand harmonious whole. 
One can hardly exaggerate his influence upon the study of the natural 
sciences. His was one of those creative, fertile minds from which all who 
made his acquaintance, either personally or through his writings, were bound 
to catch inspiration. He must have had a most engaging personality, and 
was undoubtedly filled with enthusiasm. How otherwise could he have 
drawn annually to Upsala some fifteen hundred pupils from all parts of 
Europe? His "Systema Naturae," "Genera Plantarum," "Critica Bo- 
tanica," and other famous works, are unquestionably notable landmarks in 
the history of natural science. Science and their influence we can to some 
extent estimate; but who can estimate the profound influence he must have 
exerted on the many thousand pupils who listened to his prelections, and 
who carried his enthusiasm with them into every civilized country! Hon- 
ored and admired in his own day, Carl von Linne" will ever continue to be 
recognized as one of the foremost men of all time. 

The Royal Society of Canada. 

The President and Fellows of the Royal Society of Canada beg to offer 
their cordial thanks to the New York Academy of Sciences for its kind 
invitation to participate in the exercises commemorative of the two hundredth 
anniversary of the birth of Carl von Linn6, and express their regret that they 
are unable to send a delegate to personally represent their Society on this 
most interesting occasion. 

The Royal Society of Canada, which has just closed its Twenty-fifth 
Annual Meeting, shares with the New York Academy of Sciences and with 
kindred associations all over the world, in its high appreciation of the eminent 
services rendered to the natural sciences by the transcendent ability, judg- 
ment and foresight so remarkably displayed by the distinguished Swedish 
naturalist of the eighteenth century. To him is due in no small measure 
the modern system of scientific nomenclature, and by him were laid the 
foundations of the classification of animals and plants upon which biologists 
in all departments have since built their structures of scientific knowledge. 
It is therefore in the highest degree fitting that the name of so great a man 
as Linne", the precursor of a long line of eminent philosophers, should be 


honored in America in the manner that is now proposed, and that the beauti- 
ful bridge connecting the Botanical Gardens and the Zoological Park in 
New York should by its name perpetually remind the passer-by of the great- 
ness that may be achieved by intellectual and scientific attainments. In 
an age that may be considered sordid in many of its occupations and aspira- 
tions, such a reminder is of great value, and may lead many to think of the 
man, and endeavor, in however humble a manner, to tread in his footsteps. 
All honor to the name of Carl von Linne! May the torch which he 
kindled with the flame of natural science, which has illuminated the path 
of numberless followers during two hundred years, never be extinguished! 
May we all strive by our diligent work, by our enthusiasm, by our lofty 
aims and high hopes, to keep it alive and pass it on, ever growing more and 
more brilliant, to those who shall come after us ! 

WM. SAUNDERS, President. 

The Entomological Society of Ontario. 

The President and Officers of the Entomological Society of Ontario are 
pleased to have an opportunity of adding a few words, to the many which 
will be read at the commemorative exercises which are to be held on the 23d 
instant, in appreciation of the magnificent work which was done for the 
whole world of science by Carl von Linn6, the founder of systematic natural 
history. It is, however, with deep regret that we find it impossible to send 
a delegate to take part personally in this celebration. 

By entomologists and botanists especially, the name of Linne must 
always be held in reverence and respect, for to him is in large measure due 
the placing of these branches of natural histoiy on a stable and permanent 
foundation. He was indeed the father of systematic biology; and the mem- 
bers of our Society feel that too much honor can never be bestowed upon the 
memory of so great a man. It is therefore a cause of much gratification 
that a lasting monument in the shape of a beautiful bridge crossing the Bronx 
River has been erected, which will be a constant reminder to all visiting 
the Botanical Garden and Zoological Park of the work which was done by 
this master mind. 

CHARLES J. S. BETHUNE, Secretary. 


Sociedad Cientifica "Antonio Alzate," Mexico, D.F. 

By request of the Sociedad Cientifica "Antonio Alzate" of the City of 
Mexico, I have the honor to represent that distinguished Society as its 
delegate to the New York Academy of Sciences on the occasion of the 
exercises commemorative of the two hundredth anniversary of the birth 
of Linnaeus. 

The Society Antonio Alzate, which represents the scientific thought of 
the Republic of Mexico, is composed of men of high attainments, many of 
whom, through the important official publications of the Society and through 
other media, have made rich contributions to the sciences of botany, zoology, 
chemistry, astronomy and other branches of learning. These enlightened 
men are in full sympathy with the most advanced men of science in the 
United States. 

The members of this important Society are fully imbued with the Lin- 
nsean spirit, and are animated by the same desire to emulate the great 
example of the master that inspires their New York brethren. 

By the instructions of the Society Antonio Alzate I bring the friendly 
greetings and hearty sympathy of its members to the New York Academy 
of Sciences as it celebrates this interesting and notable anniversary. 


The Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University. 

The Museum of Comparative Zoology in Harvard University accepts 
with pleasure the invitation of the Academy to participate in the exercises 
commemorative of Linnaeus, and it has requested Mr. William Brewster, a 
member of its staff, to represent it upon that occasion. 

Linnseus embraced the whole department of natural history in its widest 
sense. His conspicuous contributions to botany have much obscured the 
fact that every field of nature was investigated by him with productive results. 
Throughout the entire range of inorganic and organic nature he passed with 
steady step, introducing methods of study and systems of terminology which 
brought order out of confusion. 

Recognizing the indebtedness which all natural science owes to Linnaeus, 
our Museum joins in the tributes which at this time the whole world is pay- 
ing to his name. 

CHARLES W. ELIOT, President. 


The Boston Society of Natural History. 

The Boston Society of Natural History, through its official representa- 
tive, Mr. JOEL ASAPH ALLEN, sends its greetings and congratulations t 
the New York Academy of Sciences, and desires to share in the celebration 
of the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of CARL VON LINNE. 

Upon the basis of the scientific achievements of the great Swedish 
naturalist, all subsequent work in botany and zoology has been built up. 
To his labors and to the system introduced by him, we owe the possibility 
of recording, and thereby mastering, the immense and bewildering flora and 
fauna of the world. Our debt to him can hardly be overestimated : there- 
fore the Boston Society of Natural History is glad to add its tribute of admi- 
ration and gratitude, and begs to thank the Academy for the opportunity 
of participating in the present noteworthy celebration. 


The Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences. 

The Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences gratefully accepts the 
invitation of the New York Academy of Sciences to participate in the 
commemorative exercises to be held on the two hundredth anniversary of 
the birth of Linnaeus. 

The Academy appreciates the lasting influence which his work in botany 
and zoology has exercised on the development of these sciences throughout 
the whole world. Through his profound studies he was enabled to bring 
order out of the chaotic writings of his predecessors, to establish the science 
of taxonomy on a firm and satisfactory basis, and to prepare the way for a 
natural and logical classification of plants and animals. 

The Academy has the honor to appoint Professor ALEXANDER W. EVANS 
as its authorized representative. 

A. E. VERRILL, President. 
GEORGE F. EATON, Secretary. 

The American Journal of Science. 

The editorial staff of the "American Journal of Science" whose birth 
in 1818 was contemporaneous with the beginnings of natural science in this 
country, and which for nearly a century has kept pace with the growth of 


science, and ever striven to support and stimulate it desires to express to 
you its profound appreciation of the debt we all owe to the great Swedish 
naturalist whose birth in 1707 you commemorate. 

If science is classified knowledge, the highest credit belongs to him who 
brings scientific facts and observations into a rational system: in this work 
Linneeus stands pre-eminent. To his keen mind it was given not only to 
bring order among the genera and species of plants and animals, not only 
to build up a lasting system of nomenclature, but also to develop in these 
directions, as in the broader relations, a profound basis of classification 
which has had a lasting influence upon science in all its branches. 

EDWARD S. DANA, Editor-in-chief. 

The Torrey Botanical Club, New York City. 

A clearly-stated conspectus of contents and an index so arranged that one 
may consult the contents with a minimum of labor are two crowning features 
of any volume. They reveal a systematic as well as a constructive intelli- 
gence on the part of the author, and mark the boundaries between chaos 
and clearness. It is with this feeling that botanists look back to Linnaeus, 
not so much for the originality of his research as for his gift of order, by 
means of which the unclassified botanical observations of two centuries were 
reduced to a system. It matters not that this system perished almost in a 
generation; it served a purpose in its own day, and made progress possible 
to those who had previously been wandering over a boundless sea with 
neither stars nor sun to guide them. Linnaeus is remembered, not because 
of his research, but because of his arrangement of existing knowledge in a 
usable form. 

In spite of his blunders (for he was not free from them), in spite of his 
arbitrary substitutions of his own work for the clearer work of others, in spite 
of the fact that he emphasized system at the expense of the broader principles 
of comparison, and withal contributed to the fixing, for five generations, 
the dogma of constancy of specific characters, botanists will always regard 
Linnseus as one of the truly great. He was the "father of botany," not 
even its elder brother. He was not the author of binomial nomenclature, 
for that originated before Linnaeus was born; he was the first w T ho was able 
to look at the existing knowledge of plant life with some degree of perspective, 
and he reduced that knowledge to a system, that botany might later become 
a science. 



New York Entomological Society. 


The name of Linnaeus, the illustrious naturalist who first pointed out 
the real utility of some system by which the great kingdoms of nature could 
be systematically arranged, is known to the whole civilized world. 

Linnaeus was not only a naturalist of most accurate observation, but of a 
philosophical mind, and upon this depended in a great degree the unpar- 
alleled influence which he exercised upon the progress of every branch of 
natural history. 

If we consider the difficulties which beset his early scientific career, the 
limited number of collections of animals and plants at his command, we must 
admit that the merit which his contemporaries awarded him was very 
justly earned. 

Among the important services which he rendered to science was the 
creation of a natural system of classification and the introduction of a more 
precise nomenclature, which in the main is followed to-day. 

While quite young he received his first inspiration for natural history 
in his father's garden, which was planted with many rare shrubs and flowers. 
Those sparks which were kindled in the early part of his life at last burst 
into such a flame of intensity, that the marks are indelibly left upon the 

Entomology owes much to the work of this great man. 

In his "Systema Naturae" (tenth edition), he divided the insects into 
seven orders, as follows : Coleoptera, Hemiptera, Lepidoptera, Neuroptera, 
Hymenoptera, Diptera and Aptera. 

The modern orders Forficulidae and Orthoptera were placed with the 
Coleoptera; the order Thysanoptera, with the Hemiptera. The order 
Neuroptera included the modern orders Ephemerida, Plecoptera, Isoptera, 
Corrodentia, Platyptera, Neuroptera, Mecoptera, Trichoptera and Odonata. 
The order Aptera contained all the insects without wings or elytra, except 
the females of Mutillidae, including also those arthropods which form to-day 
the classes of Arachnida and Myriapoda. Each order contained a small 
number of genera which were not arranged into families. 

Of the many insects described by him, about three hundred species 
occur in the United States, most of which were originally described from 
Europe, and some from South America. Of the different orders repre- 
sented, Linnaeus described seven species of Neuroptera, four species of 
Odonata, twelve species of Orthoptera, twenty-seven species of Hemiptera, 


a hundred species of Coleoptera, fifty species of Diptera, twenty-eight 
species of Hymenoptera and sixty-six species of Lepidoptera. 

The New York Entomological Society appreciates this opportunity of 
paying tribute to the memory of the man through whose wonderful far-sight 
and scientific attainment we are better able to understand the great system 
of nature. 

C. W. LENG, President. 

H. G. BARBER, Secretary. 




Rhodites rosse Sphex pennsylvanica 

Rhyssa persuasoria Oxybelus uniglumis 

Chalcis minuta Monobia quadridens 

Pteromalus puparum Polistes canadeasis 

Formica fusca carolinus 

" rufa " annularis 

Lasius niger Vespa crabro 

Odontomachus haematodes " maculata 

Tetramorium csespitum " rufa 

Monomorium pharaonis " vulgaxis 

Sphaerophthalma occidentalis Coelinxyz quadridentata 

Pompilus tropicus Bombus carolinus 

Chalybion cseruleum " hortorum 

Sphex ichneumonea Apis mellifera 


Danais plexippus Cosmosoma auge 

Heliconius charitonius Utetheisa ornatrix 

Agraulis vanillae Phragmatobia fuliginoea 

Vanessa antiopa Euplexia lucipara 

Pyrameis atalanta Dyptergia scabriuscula 

Victorina steneles Pyripbila pyramidoides 

Anartia jatrophse " tragopoginis 

Ageronia feronia Perodroma oculta 

Diadema misippus Scoliopterix libatrix 

Calephelis csenius Plusia culta 

Leptalis melite Ophiderus materna 

Catapsilia eubule Erebus odora 

" philea Euproctis chrysorrhaea 

1 Contributed by the New York Entomological Society. 


Papilio ajax Bombyx mori 

philenor Hydria undulata 

polydamus Eustroma papulata 

inackaon Rheumaptera hastata 

troilus " tristata 

turnus Philobia notata 

glaucus Eramis defoliaria 

Pamphila comma Anagoga pulveraria 

.(Ellopus tantalus Zeuzera pyrina 

" ixion Sesia culiciformis 

Triptogon lugubris " tipuliformis 

Chcerocampa tersa Diaphamia hyalinata 

Argeus labruscae Pyrausta octomaculata 

Pachylia ficus Pyralis farinalis 

Pholus vitis Crambus puscuellus 

Pseudospbinx tetrio Calleria mellonella 

Dilophonota ello Ophomia sociella 

Phlegothontius Carolina Orneodes hexadactyla 

Sphinx pinastri Olethreutea hartmanniana 

Samia cecropia Carpopapsa pomonella 


Cicindela Carolina Ptinus fur 

Virginia Ernobius mollis 

Elaphrus riparius Sitodrepa panicea 

Blethisa rnultipunctata Phanseus carnifex 

Loricera cserulescens Aphodius fossor 

Bembidium ustulatum " erraticus 

" 4-maculatum " fimetarius 

Casnonia pennsylvanica " granariua 

Eretes sticticus Trox scaber 

Dytiscus marginalis Polyphylla occidentals 

Hydrobius fuscipes Peiidnota punctata 

Splueridium scarabseoides Dynastes tityus 

Cercyon raelanocephalum Cotinis nitida 

unipunctatum Euphoria inda 

Silpha americana Mallodon melanopus 

opaca Prionus imbricornis 

Staphylinus erythropterus Hylotrupes bajulus 

Tachyporus chrysomelinus Achryson surinamum 

Conosoma littoreum Tragidion coquus 

Hippodamia 13-punctata Leptura sexmaculata 

Coccinella trifasciata Lagochirus araneiformis 

" sanguinea Crioceris asparagi 

Adalia bipunctata " 12-punctatus 

Harmonia 14-guttata Adoxus obscurus 

Chilocorua cacti " vitis 


Hyperaspidius trimaculatus Prasocuris Phellandrii 

Silvanus surinamensis Chrysomela philadelphica 

Typhcea fumata Gastroidea polygon! 

Dermestes lardarius Lina lapponica 

Attagenus pellio Gonioctena pallida 

Anthrenus scrophulariae Phyllodecta vulgatissima 

" musaeorum Trirhabda tomentossa 

Hister bimaculatus Crepidodera rufipes 

Carpophilus hemipterus " Helxines 

Epursea sestiva Modeeri 

Nitidtda bipustulata Bruchus pisorum 

" rufipes " chinensis 

Omosita colon Blaps mortisaga 

Latridius minutus Unis ceramboides 

Tenebriodes mauritanica Tenebrio molitor 

Peltis ferruginea Nacerdes melanura 

Cyphon padi Brachyderus incanus 

Alaue oculatus Otiorhynchus ovatus 

Corymbites tesselatus Elleschus bipunctatus 

cruciatus Clonus scrophulariae 

Ellychnia corrusca Cryptorhynchus lapathi 

Photinus pyralis Rhinoncus p^ricarpius 

Buprestis aurulenta Brenthus anchorago 

Lamphrohiza splendida Rhynchophorus palraarum 

Necrobiaviolacea Calandra oryzse 


Pachycoris fabricii Capsus ater 

Euthyrhynchus floridanus Monalocoris filicis 

Mormidea ypsilon Halticus apterus 

Euscbistus ictericus Acanthia lectularia 

Nezara vividula Coriscus ferus 

Edessa arabs Arilus cristatus 

Leptoglossus phyllopus Heza acantharis 

balteatus Zelus longipes 

Ligyrocoris sylvestris Reduvius personatus 

Embletbis arenarius Salda littoralis 

Largus succinctus " saltatoria 

Dysdercus andrese Corixa etriata 

Leptopterna dolobrata Lygus pabulinus 
Lygus pratensis 


Trichocera regelationis Eristalis tenax 

Xiphura atrata Syritta pipiens 

Chironomus pedellus Gastrophilus haemorrhoidalis 


Orthocladius barbicornis (Estrus oris 

Cricotopus tremulus (Edemagena tarandri 

Tanypus monilis Melanophora roralis 

Culex pipiens Cynomyia mortuorum 

Scatapse notata Calliphora vomitaria 

Simulius reptans Lucilia xsesor 

Hermetia illucens Pyrellia cadaverina 

Sargus cuprarius Musca domestica 

Microchrysa polita Stomoxys calcitrana 

Tabanus mexicanus Hamalomyia canicularis 

Anthrax moris Anthomyia pluvialis 

Bombylius major " radicum 

Scenoppinus fenestralis Scatophaga stercoraria 

Laphira gilva Tetanocera umbrarum 

Erax aestuans Scaptera nibrans 

Leucozona lucorum Themira patris 

Lasiophthicus pyrastri Piophila casei 

Syrphus ribesii Scyphella flava 

Sphaerophoria seripta Hippobosca equina 

Sericomyia lappona Ornithomyia avicularia 

Doliosyrphus nemorum Melaphagus ovinus 


Forficula auricularia Stagmomatis Carolina 

Labia minor Achurum brevicornis 

Blatta germanica Dissosteira Carolina 

Stylopyga orientalis Cyrtophyllus perspicillatus 

Periplaneta americana Conocephalus triops 

Pycnoscelus surinamensis Gryllus domesticus 


Trithemis umbrata Libellula quadrimaculata 

Tramea Carolina ^Eschna juncea 


Clothilla pulsatoria Psocus sexpunctatus 
Csecilius pedicularis 


Chauliodes pectinicornis Corydalus cornutus 


Limnophilus rhombicus Leptocerus niger 


The Staten Island Association of Arts and Sciences. 

It has been said by Taine that "every book and every man may be 
reviewed in five pages, and those five pages in five lines." On this occasion, 
however, we are not asked to review the life or the books of the man in whose 
honor we are assembled, but to testify as briefly as may be to our appreciation 
of his work and what this work has meant to his posterity. Such a task is 
different from that which the reviewer is ordinarily called upon to perform; 
and to do it justice in words, within a reviewer's recognized limitations, 
would be impossible in connection with the name of Linnaeus. Fortunately, 
however, words are not necessary, and indeed are superfluous, where this 
appreciation is so clearly demonstrated in the fact that we accept the prin- 
ciples which he formulated, and pursue the methods which were his, in all 
of our scientific activities. By merely recognizing and calling attention to 
this fact, we show our respect for the man and what he has wrought far 
better than by even the most earnest and sincere attempt to express our 
sentiments in words. 

Consciously or unconsciously the influence of Linnaeus is felt by all 
modern scientific workers. System, or rather the ability to systematize, 
is the key to progress in all lines of human endeavor; and science in particular 
owes its present commanding position to those who have recognized and 
applied the principles of Linnaeus in their work, and who have accepted 
and applied his rules for the nomenclature of natural objects. 

Linnaeus was pre-eminently a systematist, and it was this habit of mind, 
more than anything else, which raised him above his contemporaries in 
science. Without his masterly ability to co-ordinate and arrange his work 
in logical sequence and coherent groupings, his great powers of observation 
would have lacked completeness. This ability was the special characteristic 
which enabled him to revolutionize the scientific work of his age and to 
influence so profoundly all that has followed. 

To Linnaeus may well be applied the words of Bourget: "In life every- 
thing is unique, and nothing happens more than once." 


New Tork State Museum. 

Linnets contributions to systematic biology are brilliantly exemplified 
by one of his species of fossil brachiopods, the Anomites reticularis. No 
organism which ever appeared in the long history of the earth has had a 


career so noteworthy for the stability of its specific characters. It made its 
de"but in the Midsilurian era, and thence onward it survived through the 
long ages of the Devonian and into the Carboniferous, without at any time 
departing from the specific type. 

Anomites reticularis stands as the ideal of conservatism, the very shib- 
boleth of heredity, Nature's ultimate expression of stability in the organic 
world. Its life was the longest that ever fell to the lot of organic species; 
its period beheld the rise and fall of many another race; an endless procession 
of creations saluted it and passed on, as we to-day, after two hundred 
years, salute the great Swede, and pass on to join the multitude. 

JOHN M. CLARKE, Director. 

The Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences. 

The Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences, in expressing its thanks to your 
honorable Society, and its appreciation of its privilege in being permitted 
by your courteous invitation to share in your celebration of the two hundredth 
anniversary of the birth of Carl von Linne, desires to add its tribute of 
praise to the memory of that great reformer in the work of natural science. 

The world must ever be grateful to Linnaeus for the wonderful knowledge, 
born of close and accurate observation, and for the clear vision and admirable 
judgment which enabled him to index the book of Nature, to substitute order 
for confusion, and, by the judicious simplicity of the laws laid down by him 
in his methods of classification, to convert, what before his time had been 
chaotic, into the orderly ways that characterize the modern systematic 
study of botany and biology. 

To him and to his work we turn as the starting-point for these scientific 
studies which since his day have been so nobly developed by those who have 
been his successors. 

Though his system may have been superseded by the philosophical 
conclusion of other famous workers in botanical science during the past two 
centuries, the revolution which he wrought in that great department of 
nature study, the lucidity and simplicity of the reforms in method which he 
first proposed, have crowned him as one of the greatest leaders known to 
the annals of science, and as such we honor and revere his memory. 

We ask you to accept our felicitations on this interesting occasion. 

T. GUILFORD SMITH, President. 


The American Philosophical Society. 

The American Philosophical Society held at Philadelphia for Promoting 
Useful Knowledge sends cordial greetings to the New York Academy of 
Sciences on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundredth anniversary 
of the birth of Carolus Linnaeus. 

Out of the mechanical and inorganic systems of ancient and mediaeval 
times this great Swedish naturalist constructed an organized system, which, 
assisted by the binomial nomenclature, established order and system in the 
natural sciences. This system has guided clearly the mind of man in the 
classification of natural objects, and has made the name of its author 

In the year 1770 The American Philosophical Society, in recognition 
of the valuable services Carolus Linnaeus rendered to science, elected him 
to its membership, and now, a hundred and thirty-seven years later, this 
Society takes pleasure in uniting with the New York Academy of Sciences 
in doing honor to his memory. 

Signed and sealed on behalf of The American Philosophical Society 
held at Philadelphia for Promoting Useful Knowledge. 

EDGAR F. SMITH, President. 
J. MINIS HAYS, Secretary. 

The National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C. 

I am directed by President IRA REMSEN of the National Academy of 
Sciences to convey the greetings and congratulations of the National Acad- 
emy on this occasion of the celebration of the two hundredth anniversary 
of the birth of Linnaeus. I desire to present a brief appreciation of Linnaeus 
from the standpoint of comparative anatomy and classification of the 

The period of Linnaeus was that of his active scientific life, between 1730 
and 1795. Linnaeus did not introduce the term "Mammalia" until the 
tenth edition of the "Systema" (1758). In following the suggestions of 
Ray, Bernard de Jussieu, and, it is also claimed, of Blumenbach, he sepa- 
rated the hairy quadrupeds, the manatees and whales, as a single class, 
noting among the distinctive characters the position of the mammae and the 
hairy covering. His education as a physician qualified him to define the 
class through the internal anatomical characters, the heart, the lungs, 
the sense organs, as well as through external characters. In arranging 


the mammals he sought for natural groupings, and endeavored to find the 
hidden bonds of structural affinity as indicated by comparative anatomy, 
although he did not recognize that the real basis of affinity is to be found in 
kinship of evolution from similar ancestral forms. 

His scientific independence and genius were indicated especially by his 
inclusion of man with the apes and monkeys in the order Primates. It was 
a mark of genius that Linnaeus felt the force of the anatomical likeness of 
man to his lower relatives and that he had the courage to definitely ally him 
with them from a strictly zoological view-point. This is the very starting- 
point of all modern philosophy, that man is linked by ties of blood kinship 
to the whole organic world. 

That Linnseus's system is based in part on adaptive resemblances or 
analogies, rather than on structural affinities or homologies, is not surprising, 
because it is only recently that naturalists have been able to distinguish 
analogies from homologies. 


The Smithsonian Institution of Washington, D.C. 

The Smithsonian Institution, uniting with the New York Academy of 
Sciences in its appreciation of Carl von Linne", cordially accepts its invitation 
to participate in exercises commemorative of the two hundredth anniversary 
of the birth of the great Swedish naturalist. 

The Smithsonian Institution, in response to the invitation to take part in 
the Academy's celebration of the bicentenary by an appreciative record of 
the work of von Linne", needs only to recall the great impulse which he gave 
to natural science by his industry and methods, and the facility for expression 
of facts by his binomial system of nomenclature. But the philosophic 
generalization which was recorded in the name of Mammalia may be espe- 
cially recalled as the greatest morphological triumph of the Linnaean era. 

CHAS. D. WALCOTT, Secretary. 

The Biological Society of Washington, Washington, D.C. 

The Biological Society of Washington acknowledges with pleasure the 
invitation of the New York Academy of Sciences to take part in its cele- 
bration of the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of Carl von Linne", 
and is glad to unite in paying fitting tribute to the memory of the man who 
is justly regarded as the father of the biological sciences. 


It is, in fact, scarcely possible to overestimate the influence his work and 
personality had in shaping the future of botany and zoology; and coming 
generations of biologists will continue to rejoice, as we now do, that he laid 
the foundations of their science so deep and so broad. 

The vocabulary of superlatives to praise his genius has long since been 
exhausted; but we who daily and hourly profit by the laws he enunciated 
may well pause in our work to exult because, two hundred years ago, Sweden 
gave to the world a light that will continue to shed luster upon her name so 
long as the biological sciences exist. 

WILFRED H. OSGOOD, Secretary. 

The Indiana Academy of Sciences, Indianapolis, Ind. 

The criterion by which a man's greatness is judged is his work. If this 
gains recognition from his contemporaries, he is successful; if his name 
lives to be honored by succeeding generations, his career has been more than 
successful, he has achieved fame; but, if he leaves behind him some piece of 
work or the record of some discovery from which his successors reckon time, 
his is a distinction which comes to few men, and to which none dare aspire. 
Such is the record of Linnaeus. He was a recognized leader among his 
contemporaries; his co-ordination of the chaos which then existed in the 
natural sciences gave him fame; and the successful application of the bino- 
mial system of nomenclature to animals and plants made his works the point 
from which the taxonomist measures time. Nor is the homage the expression 
of the whim of a group of hero- worshipers. To-day the system of Linnaeus 
is discarded by taxonomists, and much of his work is forgotten ; but as long 
as systematic botany and zoology have their devotees among men of science, 
so long will his name be remembered and his fame endure as the one who 
first brought the binomial system of nomenclature into general use. 

GUY WEST WILSON, for the Academy. 

The Colorado Scientific Society, Denver, Colo. 

The Colorado Scientific Society, the oldest and largest scientific associa- 
tion of the Rocky Mountain region, sends greeting to its elder sister in the 
metropolis of America, and extends congratulations on the successful com- 
pletion of the memorial in honor of the world's greatest botanist. How 
great must be the power of the savant whose influence can extend over 


such great gulfs of space and time as those which separate the sage of 
Upsala from the naturalists of the Rocky Mountains, the lands of the 
midnight sun from the dome of the North American Continent, the dawn 
of the eighteenth from that of the twentieth century! 

In common with the rest of the scientific world, we are greatly indebted 
to him who initiated the modern system of a concise and descriptive nomen- 
clature, to him who found "biology a chaos, and left it a cosmos," and to 
him who made it possible for finite minds to grasp the thoughts of the Infinite 
in the world of life. 

Colorado is especially indebted to Linnaeus from the fact that, owing to 
the general similarity of our Alpine flora to the plants of the Scandinavian 
Alps, a large portion of our mountain plants was originally described by the 
father of botany, and so well classified and described, that the notoriety- 
seeking, hair-splitting species-makers do not venture to meddle with the 
work of the master hand. 

We are proud of the fact that on the snowy summits of our higher peaks 
grows in abundance the tiny pink-tipped flower which the innate modesty 
of the true savant led him to select from all the wealth of the floral world to 
perpetuate his name in coming generations. 

G. L. CANNON, President. 

University of California 


405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1388 

Return this material to the library 

from which it was borrowed. 

1 4 1996 









Form L9-52w