1910] The Ottawa Xaturai.ist. 115 



reaching a living plant and is hence endowed specially with the 

 power of motion. But what will this little plant do if we remove 

 a large number of plants in its immediate neighborhood and 

 provide it v/ith props of all kinds of inorganic matter (glass rods, 

 pins, matches, etc.)? It grows towards these obstacles but 

 turns away scornfully after realizing its error, and continues its 

 life crawling about until it has succeeded, as it generally does, 

 in discovering the living plant, or plants. Is this also nature, 

 this intellectual power of discrimination? Then, dear reader, 

 if you answer in the affirmative, give your reasons and explain 

 nature, instinct, intellectl An infant beginning to walk eagerly 

 catches hold of an\^hing to support itself, but when having 

 mastered a few steps it indignantly refuses support this not 

 being needed becomes dispensable. Plants like Ampslopsis or 

 Clematis attach themselves by means of haustoria or tendrils 

 for support. This function becomes immediately arrested if we 

 provide them with supports by tying them up. The plants 

 having achieved their purpose consider it unnecessary to support 

 themselves and haustoria and tendrils remain inactive. Several 

 genera of Amaryllidaceae have the power, under given conditions, 

 of moving their anthers towards the style, but they only so 

 exert themselves when no insect fertilization is likely to take 

 place. 



I have chosen here examples which strikingly illusirate 

 these points, they exist in hundreds of others, and probably in all 

 plants; only far less readily perceptable. We strangely hesitate 

 to regard plants as being possessed of anything more than 

 spontaneous, responsive, actions. We disregard the fact that 

 plants, being confined to their place of growth, cannot display 

 their intellectual powers like animals capable of moving about. 

 The movements which I have referred to certainly are intelligent, 

 we cannot deny this. Within comparatively recent years 

 botanists have begun to pay attention to such phenomena. 

 And, if the physiologist has an explanation for many phenomena, 

 yet not all are satisfactorily explained, and whether we have 

 psvchological functions besides, is a question the study of which 

 will make botany one of the most interesting of the sciences. 

 Charles Darwin, the great natural philosopher, the distinguished 

 geographer, geologist, mineralogist, zoologist and botanist, also 

 advanced our knowledge of psychology more than is generally 

 acknowledged. His observations directed our thoughts into 

 these channels. Those who are unfamiliar with his works 

 "Climbing Plants," "Movements in Plants," "Insectivorous 

 Plants" should read them and they will get a glimpse of this 

 marvellous man's mind. He has left, in his son Francis, a 

 powerful observer who goes further than his father, who refers 



