347 
and specific names and in descriptions. He strongly advocated 
the publication of a Latin description in the case of a new species. 
He was very impatient of the use of barbarisms in Latin nomen- . 
clature. 
As a man, Professor Eaton was possessed of a most pleasant 
personality, winning the esteem and love of all who had the privi- 
lege of acquaintanceship with him. He was generous to the ex- 
treme and counted neither time nor trouble when performing 
any act of friendship. : 
As a botanist he was careful to an extraordinary degree. No 
work of his was ever slovenly or hastily done, and he had little 
sympathy with work of that kind on the part of others. His in- 
struments were most carefully kept in order, his microscopic 
preparations most neatly prepared, finished and labelled, and all 
the results of his study compared and worked over and over 
again. His extraordinary severity in these matters led him to 
publish much less than he otherwise might well have done. 
Professor Eaton was very conservative in regard to changes in 
scientific methods and views. He was loth to part with what he 
considered good until he was absolutely convinced that he might 
obtain something better. But when the better had really been 
demonstrated he lost no time in changing either views or methods. 
His attitude toward. the various proposed changes in the rules for 
governing the nomenclature is a good case in point. While 
anxious that there should be no blind adherence to rules already 
established, and perfectly ready to accept such changes as might 
lessen such confusion as already really existed, he viewed retroac- 
tive measures overturning hosts of names already long and firmly 
established in the literature as productive of great immediate con-_ 
fusion without giving by any means a certain promise of surer 
criteria upon which to establish stability in the future; in fact as 
giving no greater certainty, if as great, as that given by the rules 
already existing and followed for years by the best workers. 
Asa teacher he was kindly and inspiring, not suited to manage 
large classes of unwilling students, such as often fell to his lot, 
where much sternness and rigor was needed to compel the 
wavering attention and to force the stubborn mind to effort, but 
especially fitted to encourage and to train those desirous of pur- 
