ppears not to have duly appreciated,
if he was even aware of, the circumstances which induced the Fellows of
the Linnaean and Horticultural Societies of London to erect this grateful
tribute of respectful esteem to him, who in his life-time, had done more
than any individual, ancient or modern, towards enlarging the boundaries
of the science of horticulture, and very extensively the far more
difficult one of botany likewise. These he accomplished in the numerous
editions of his unrivalled Dictionary, and in his elaborate
introductions to botanical knowledge.

"The reasons which induced the above-mentioned societies to erect the
monument in question, were, chiefly, because neither monument, nor tomb,
nor even any recording public notice whatever (the 'monumentum aere
perennius' of his own immortal works excepted) had previously been
provided by any one.

"The relatives of Miller were very few; he had no family, save two sons,
one of whom died early, and the other, Charles Miller, at the age of 78,
who spent the greater part of his long life in India, and returned not
until after his father's funeral; and over his grave, in the old
church-yard of Chelsea, a stone and sculptured brass record his name and
age and parentage, together with that of his aged and more distinguished
sire. This stone, too, was placed by the above-mentioned public-spirited
societies, (unto both which the writer has the honour to belong) at the
same time as the monument, stated by Faulkner, to the never-dying fame
of the father.

"But it is even now scarcely known, that when those meritorious
testimonials of public gratitude were showered over the memory of Philip
Miller, who had laboured so long and so successfully in the sciences
which he loved, there was only one individual in existence, and that a
very aged person, who had seen and attended the funeral of Miller, and
who alone could point out the very spot where the 'Prince of
Horticulture' was inhumed. This venerable person's name was Goodyer; he
was the parish clerk of Chelsea church for half a century, and died as
such in 1818, at the great age of ninety-four.

"Nevertheless, though last, it should not be concealed that I myself had
actually stated and published, in the winter of 1794-5, the neglectful
and opprobrious fact of Miller's having no single grave-stone, much less
a monument, nor even one funeral line, to designate the spot where
rested in its 'narrow house' the mortal relics of