ANIMAL, in natural an orga nised and living body, endowed with the powers of sensation, and of spontane ous loco-motion. Some hare defined ani mals, from their loco-motion, as being capable of shifting from place to place, whereas plants adhere to the same sub ject. This property they assume, as the greatcharacteristic by which animals be distinguished from the other orders of beings. On this principle, however, oys ters, barnacles, and many zoophytes, would be almost excluded from the class of animals, inasmuch as they usually ad here or grow to rocks, &c. and yet iris certain that these creatures are real ani mals. But loco-motion alone is not suffi cient to constitute the generic difference of animals; nor, indeed, does it sufficient ly distinguish an animal from a plant Many instances are produced in which plants manifest loco-motive power. This is the case with those denominated sensi tive plants, many of which, upon the slightest touch, shrink back and fold up their leaves ; as the snail in the slightest touch retires into its shell. There are some, on which if a fly perches, instantly close and crush the insect to death. Plants also change their position and form in different circumstances and seasons they take advantage of good weather, and guard themselves against bad weather ; they open their leaves and flowers in the day, and close them at night ; some close before sun-set, and some after ; some open to receive rain, and some close to avoid it ; some follow the sun, and some turn from it; the leaves of some plants are in constant motion during the day, and at night they sink to a kind of rest or sleep. It has also been observed, that a plant has a power of directing its roots for procuring food ; and that it has a fa culty of recovering its natural position after it has been forced from it. A hop plant, for instance, in twisting round a pole, directs its course from south to west, as the sun does; if it be tied in the opposite direction it dies ; but Wit be left loose in this direction, it will regain its natural course in a single night A ho proceeds in a certain direc tion, till it be too long to sustain itself; it then acquires strength by shooting into a spiral form; and if it meet with ano ther plant of the same kind, both these coalesce for mutual support, one twisting to the right and the other to the left. There are other instances in which plants manifest a faculty of loco-motion; and, perhaps, in almost as eminent a degree as sonic animals. Oysters, e. g. are fixed to one place as much as plants, nor have they any power of motion, besides that of opening and shutting their shells; nor do they seem, in this respect, to have any superiority, With regard to the powers of motiOn, to the sensitive plant, and others of a similar kind. In order, therefore, to form a complete and satisfactory distinc tion between aniinals.and vegetables, as well as minerals, it is necessary to com bine with spontaneous loco-motion, which they unquestionably possess in a more perfect degree than plants, the powers of sensation. These seem to be unexcep tionably distinguishing and characteristic. However, M. Buffon, after allowing that, although progressive motion constitute a perceptible difference between an animal and a vegetable, this distinction is neither general nor essential, proceeds to state, that sensation more essentially distinguish es animals from vegetables. But ke adds, that this distinction is neither sufficiently general nor decided. If sensation, he says, implied no more than motion consequent upon a stroke or impulse, the sensitive plant enjoys this power; whereas, if by sensation we mean the faculty of perceiv ing, and of comparing ideas, it is uncer tain whether brute animals are endowed with this faculty. If it should be allowed to dogs, elephants, &c. whose actions
seem to proceed from motives similar to those by which men are actuated, it must be denied to many species of animals, particularly to those that appear not to possess the faculty of progressive motion. If the sensation of an oyster, e. a% differ in degree only from that of a dog; why do we not ascribe the same sensation to ve getables, though in a degree still infe rior ? In examining the distinction which arises from the manner of feeding, he ob serves, that animals have organs of ap prehension, by which they lay hold of their food: they search for pasture, and have a choice in their aliment. But, it is alleged, that plants are under the neces sity of receiving such nourishment as the soil affords them, without exerting any choice in the species of their food, or in the manner of acquiring it. However, if we attend to the organization and action of the roots and leaves, we shall soon be convinced that these are the external or gans, by which vegetables'are enabled to extract their food ; that the roots turn aside from a vein of bad earth, or from any obstacle which they meet with in search of a better soil; and that they split and separate their fibres in different directions, and even change their form, in order to procure nourishment to the plant. From this investigation, he con cludes that there is no absolute and es sential distinction between the animal and vegetable kingdoms ; but that nature pro ceeds by imperceptible degrees, from the most perfect to the most imperfect ani •nal, and from that to the vegetable ; and that the fresh water polypus may be re. garded as the last of animals, and the first of plants. After examining the distinc tions, this author proceeds to state the resemblances which take place between animals and vegetables. The power of reproduction, he says, is common to the two kingdoms, and is an analogy both universal and essential. A second resem blance may be derived from the expan sion of their parts, which is likewise a common property, for vegetables grow as well as animals ; and though some differ ence in the manner of expansion may be remarked, it is neither general nor essen tial. A third resemblance results from the manner of their propagation. Some ani mals, he says, are propagated in the same manner, and by the same means, as vegeta bles. The multiplication of the saceeren or vine-fritter, (see Aphis) which is, he observes, effected without copulation, is similar to that of plants by seed; and the multiplication of the polypus by cuttings resembles that of plants by slips. Hence it is inferred that animals and vegetables are beings of the same order, and that na ture passes from the one to the other by imperceptible degrees ; since the proper ties in which they resemble one another are universal and essential; while those by which they are distinguished are limit ed and partial. Dr. Watson, Bishop of Landaff, has examined, with his usual judgment, the distinguishing marks be tween animals and vegetables. He re jects, as insufficient, both figure and spontaneous motion ; and ifperccption be substituted in their stead, it will be found to be a criterion that is, in many respects, liable to exceptions. However, the ingenious and learned prelate pro duces many chemical, physical, and me taphysical reasons, which serve to ren der the supposition not altogether in defensible, that vegetables are endowed with the faculty of perception. Dr. Per cival, likewise, in a paper read before the Literary and Philosophical Society of Manchester, produces several arguments to evince the perceptive power of vegeta bles. From the reasoning adduced by both these ingenious writers, of which a more particular account will be giveil in the sequel of this work (see PLAiers and