Perhaps had never echo'd to the voice, Or heard the steps of man.' In the ftructure of his verfe, he is a ftudied imitator of Milton; ut it is always a faint copy, that puts us in mind of a grand oriinal. He labours to vary the paufes and cadence of his blank erse with something of Miltonic richnefs. The fame imitative propenfity is obfervable, both in the frequency of his mythological allufions, and in the length of his periods, which are often extended to eight or ten lines, without interruption of the fenfe. A remarkable example of this, too long for infertion, occurs in p. 115. The following will convey an idea of what we mean : -- A kifs Stole on the lift'ning filence; never yet Here heard: They trembled even as if the Power The reader will not fail to remark the poet's accuracy in fixing the date when the woods of Madeira firft re echoed to the found of a human kifs. There is nothing in the fmaller pieces which conclude the volume, that requires particular notice. ་ We have given our opinion freely concerning the merits of this poem: and we are not confcious of having faid any thing inconfiftent with that fpirit of fair criticifm,' or that language of a gentleman,' to which the author, in his preface, is fo obliging as to fay he has no objection.' For our own parts, indeed, the known gentleness of our nature would induce us, upon a flighter hint than this, to make an extraordinary exertion to accommodate ourfelves to the author's inclinations: but there are critics of a more ferocious temperament, who will be apt to fay that they do not care whether he has objections or not, and whom, the briftling felfconceit of this implied defiance, will move only to derision. We certainly think him a very pretty poet in his way; but are fenfible that our eftimate of his merit muft fall very far fhort of that which he has fettled in his own mind as the right one. This difference, however, we gladly leave to the determination of the public, which will pafs its judgment both on him and on us, in any fpirit and any language it thinks proper, without regard to our ob jections or diffent. VOL. VI. NO. 12. X ART. ART. VI. Sopra le Pretefe Offa d'Animali Terreftri, Silicei del Mont-Perdu, negli Alti Pirenei. Rifleffioni di Alberto Fortis, &c. &c. &c. From Memorie della Societa Italiana. Vol. X. Pt. I. IN the Journal de Phyfique (Pluviofe, An vIII. & 11.) our readers may recollect the account, given by M. Lapeyroufe, of certain animal remains faid to have been found in Mont-Perdu, a part of the higher Pyrenees. That mineralogift had himself vifited the fpot; and he ftated in a very confident manner, that he had feen bones of terreftrial animals, in a ftate of petrifaction, among remains of fhellfish, at the height of 1781 toifes (more than 12,000 English feet) above the level of the fea. Thefe petrifactions were obferved at the bafe of the conical fummit of the mountain. No entire bones were found: all bore the appearance of having been cut through at the ends by a fharp inftrument; for their fracture was perfectly fmooth. They were compofed of filicious matter, which had petrified the original fubftance more or less completely and M. Lapeyroufe, after giving drawings of them, infers that they must have been bones cut by a prodigious force, and very fharp inftruments, when the animals were alive. Such a ftrange narrative, it may easily be imagined, quickly excited the attention of geologifts; but we know of no published account of the examinations beftowed upon it, except the one now before us. The celebrity of the author, both as a mineralogist, traveller, and a geologift, entitles his criticisms to great refpect upon fuch a fubject: and we are decidedly of opinion, that the judgement which he paffes against M. Lapeyroute, independent of the weight derived from authority, is strictly just, on the grounds of its intrinfic merits. When our author was at Paris, he had an opportunity of examining the fpecimens, preserved in the Museum, of the fragments found at Mont-Perdu. He compared them with the skeletons in the National Mufeum of Anatomy; and both he and Cuvier were clearly of opinion, that only three small pieces had the leaft appearance of being animal bones. But, independent of this general circumftance, there are various points, both in Lapeyroufe's narrative, and in its deficiencies, which prove that he has drawn a very falfe inference when he denominates them the filicious fragments of bones of land animals. Abbé Fortis remarks, that three pofitions fhould first have been proved; viz. that the fragments were originally bones at all; that, if fo, they belong ed to quadrupeds; and, laftly, that thofe quadrupeds were land animals. Inftead of proving any one of these things, the Abbé is of opinion, that Lapeyroufe's narrative is inconfiftent with them all. Befides, no particulars are detailed relative to the pofition and conftruction of Mont-Perdu; is it is only defcribed by the very vague appellation of a mountain of fecondary formation.' In the first place, after talking much of the vaft number of the fragments and the very large fize of fome, Lapeyroufe only gives drawings of two very small ones, which he thinks are bones of a goat. Secondly, all the fragments were cut,-a thing moft rare in foffil bones: Nor was any one entire bone of an unequivocal kind found, as a tooth for example. If these had really belonged to animals, the teeth would certainly have remained better preferved, and more easily diftinguished than any other parts. Our author depofited in Cuvier's museum a piece of fhelly tufa, found at Andria, near Naples, in which an entire tooth remained. Thirdly, the defcription of Lapeyroufe is in every part extremely fcanty and vague,-forming a fingular contraft to the precision and pofitivenefs of his conclufions. From the fmoothnefs of the fracture, the inftrument fupposed to have cut the bones must have been extremely fharp, and the force employed in cutting them, immenfe ;-a point ftill more difficult to be proved than the existence of the bones themselves. Fourthly, the learned author obferves, that pieces of real Hint exactly resembling Lapeyroufe's fuppofed bones in form and fize, are frequently met with, for inftance in the department of the Seine and Oife, among the beds of fand. The fmooth fracture is univerfal in corals and madrepores and the Abbé knows of a mafs at Monte Galda, between Padua and Vicenza, containing talc, which, when ftruck, gives a fmell of tufa. Lafly, he defends those who doubt the account of Lapeyroufe, from his charge of ignorance of anatomy, by referring to the firft comparative anatomist of the age, M. Cuvier, who is very decidedly of Abbé Fortis's opinion. Upon the whole, we are difpofed to conclude with him, that although foffil bones are not uncommon, as in Siberia, at Montemartre, and in different parts of Germany and Italy; yet none have ever yet been found in chains of calcareous Alpine mountains of ancient formation; and that the fragments defcribed by M. Lapeyroufe, furnish no exception to the rule. Having made mention of the volcanic maffes in the neighbourhood of Padua and Vicenza, we fhall add a few notices concerning thofe very fingular productions, which occupied a confiderable fhare of Abbé Fortis's attention for fome years before his death. They confift almost entirely of tufa; but are chiefly remarkable for containing fishes of various kinds and fizes, in a ftate of complete prefervation. The colour of these remains is dark brown; but the form of the living animal, in every part, is fcarcely more perfect. That the tufa which encrufts them came from a neighbouring volcano in a ftate of eruption, cannot be doubted: X 2 doubted and, that the fall of the tufa, which follows, or rather terminates every fuch eruption, at once killed and incafed the fifhes, is equally obvious. But one appearance has been obferved, which requires fome farther explication. In a very perfect fpeci men, are found two fishes; one, of a large fize, with half the fmaller fish in its mouth, evidently in the act of devouring it. The small fish appears just feized by the other, and not yet bit in two, nor fwallowed. How could the eruption have produced this phenomenon? That the heat of the lava boiling the water, fhould have killed the two fishes at once, is impoflible; for fome time must have elapfed in the procefs; and the larger fish muft have let the fmaller one loofe. Still lefs could the fall of the tufa have killed the two at once: and, that they must have died at the fame inftant, is obvious from their pofition. If they had been thrown afhore, however fuddenly, the fmaller one must have efcaped from the other's mouth. Abbé Fortis very ingenioufly fuppofed, that while the eruption was going on, but near its end, a flash of lightning from the volcano paffed through both fishes at once, and killed them inftantaneously; that the shower of tufa immediately began to fall; and that the dead fishes were thus incafed and preferved as we now find them. ART. VII. Sopra i Denti Foffili di un Elefante trovato nelle Vicinenze di Roma. Memoria di Carlo Morrozzo. From Memorie della Societa Italiana. Vol. X. Part I. THI HIS is a very interefting memoir, upon a fubject intimately - connected with that of the laft article. The discovery of foffil bones, is an occurrence by no means rare; but the circumftances attending thofe here defcribed, are very peculiar; and, fortunately, they have been examined with a more than ordinary degree of attention. The bones described in this tract, were found by fome peasants digging in a hill near Rome, in the month of April 1802. As foon as Count Morrozzo was informed of the circumftance, he haftened to the spot, and began to obferve them minutely. He found one thigh bone of two feet four inches (Paris measure) in length; a jaw bone fix or seven inches high, and feveral teeth, weighing above 25 lib. The fize of the elephant muft have been at least double that of the largest Afiatic elephants. On being expofed to the air, the bones mouldered. In 1755, another skeleton of the fame kind was found near the fame fpot; its length was ten feet; and on exposure to the air, it fpeedily calcined. The The bones now defcribed lay north and fouth, at the depth of fix palms, in a ftratum of calcareous earth, mixed with vegetable mould; under which was a stratum of volcanic puzzolane, mixed with leucites. Upon the bony parts of these remains, it does not appear that any particular obfervations were made: But the teeth prefented appearances fufficiently fingular. They confifted of two different fubftances; one foft, white and opaque; the other hard, yellow, femitransparent and horny, traversing the former substance, which resembled the gum or matrix, in tubulæ, or fmaller fets of teeth. The fame appearance was obferved in the recent teeth of an African elephant. Our author examined both fubftances with chemical re-agents. With the mineral acids, the white matter gave a small effervefcence; the yellow matter none at all. The phosphoric acid produced no effervefcence, when poured on the yellow matter, and very little when poured on large maffes of the white; but when mixed with the latter in its mouldered or calcined ftate, the effervefcence was confiderable. It would appear from hence, that the expofure to the air caufed the bones to moulder, by enabling them to attract carbonic acid gas. At Count Morrozzo's defire, Profeffor Morecchini analyzed both these fubftances; and his experiments are inferted at length in the present memoir. We do not conceive it neceffary to follow his procefs minutely, and fhall content ourselves with noticing the refults to which it led. He found that the white and soft part, which we have called the matrix of the other, was compofed of fluat and carbonat of lime, a little phosphat of lime, and animal gluten, and, he thought, also a small portion of alumine, The yellow and hard part, was found to confift chiefly of phofphat of lime, fome carbonat of lime, and gluten. The proofs of fluoric acid are equivocal. The fame refults nearly were obtained by Cuvier, on examining fpecimens of follil teeth, and comparing them with the teeth of the African elephant, Hence it is inferred, that the opinion is erroneous which afcribes the remains found near Rome, to the elephants of Hannibal. Upon clofely examining the defcription and the drawings, however, we find that the difference of structure is very trifling. The tubulous parts in two feriefes of the African elephant's teeth, are almoft exactly fimilar to thofe of the foffil teeth; and the appearance of the other feries differs no more from the foffil bone, than from the former parts of the African elephant's tooth. Our author's own drawing muft convince any one, on the flighteft infpection, that the follil and African teeth might eafily have been different parts of the fame tooth; much more, fragments of different teeth of the fame fpecies of animal, |