260 



HARDWICKE'S SCIENCE-GOSSIP. 



specimen, was much interested, he said it was quite 

 new to him though he had seen B. album going that 

 way. I have also a five-lobed corolla of Veronica 

 agrestis, found at Caterham. Can you inform me if 

 Carduus crispus, variety litigiosus, is common in 

 England ? A specimen from near Wallington, Surrey, 

 which I have compared with the specimens in the 

 Natural History Museum, closely resembles two 

 specimens collected by Mr. de Crespigny in Surrey 

 and named as above. — H. IV. Monington. 



Fungus Hunting. — At our Annual Fungus foray 

 made in Epping Forest on Sept. 8th, under the 

 direction of our President, Dr. M. C. Cooke, M.A., 

 A.L.S., etc., assisted by Mr. Geo. Massee, F.R.M.S., 

 the number of species obtained exceeded one hundred 

 and forty, and of these twenty had not previously 

 been recorded to the Forest, and no less than five of 

 them were found to be new to Great Britain ; of these 

 twenty-nine were microscopical, five of them being 

 myxo-gasters collected by Mr. Geo. Massee. I 

 append the name of the twenty fungi found Sept. 8th, 

 1888, new to Epping : Agaricus (Pluteus) names, 



* Agaricus (A r aucoria) subg/obosus, Cortinarhis catiinus, 

 Cortinarius rigidits, Hygrophorus calyptraformis, 



* Lactariits aurantiacus, *Russula armeniaca, *Ritssn!a 

 maculata, Rnssula granulosa, Russida ji'lax, Can- 

 tharellus infundibuliformis, Comatricha tyfiluna, Coma- 

 tricha Friesiana, Licea applanata, Physarutn cinereum, 

 Fuligo varians, Hypoxylon cohecrens, Spluetvtheca 

 pannosa, Isaria farinosa, * Scolecotrichum tiniseptatum. 

 Those marked with an asterisk are new to Great 

 Britain.— Collis Willmott. 



Botanical Examination. — Mr. Chas. A. What- 

 more has assumed an ex cathedra position in answering 

 my questions, and his answers coincide with the 

 notions which the Department endeavour to impress 

 upon the public. I am not so sure that these notions 

 represent the true state of the case. Even if a 

 candidate is unsuccessful, he is entitled to have an 

 opinion of his own, especially if he has spent years 

 in the study of the subject, is well acquainted with 

 its current literature, and has passed several of the 

 earlier stages of the examination. Since my note 

 which appeared in the August number was written, 

 some new light has been thrown on the case. The 

 Botany Examination was held on June 30th, and on 

 June 14th my friend received the intimation that he 

 had not done sufficiently well to make it necessary to 

 attend the practical part of the examination at South 

 Kensington. He then wrote to ask if by that 

 intimation he was to understand that he had failed 

 altogether ? On June 20th he was informed that the 

 result would be made known to him in due course. 

 In another month he was finally informed that he had 

 altogether failed. On July 19th he wrote to ask the 

 examiners if it was possible for a candidate to receive 

 the intimation (dated June 14th) an 1 yet pass in the 

 2nd class of the honours stage ? If not, what was 



the object of keeping the candidate in suspense for 

 another month before he was informed that he had 

 failed? He also made some general remarks upon 

 the examination, and offered to submit his paper to 

 any jury of botanists of whom he had the selection of 

 half, submitting, at the same time, that the questions 

 called for only book-knowledge, and that it was not 

 possible to show practical kdowledge, and confine 

 himself to the terms imposed at the head of the paper 

 as to the manner of answering the questions. On 

 July 30th he received a letter from the Department, 

 stating that the letter to the examiners coustituted a 

 grave breach of the Department regulations, and that 

 had he been examined in any subjects other than 

 botany, his papers in all such subjects would have 

 been cancelled. The obvious reply to this was that 

 the letter to the examiners could not very well 

 influence them in giving their decision after they had 

 given it. What it would have to do with any other 

 subjects that the candidate had gone in for, it is 

 difficult to say. A few remarks on Mr. Whatmore's 

 answers to my questions. (1) In their annually pub- 

 lished reports on the results of the examinations, some 

 of the examiners have urged that the candidates did 

 pass the stages successively ; and that circumstance, 

 coupled with my own observation, leads me to infer 

 that as far as possible that condition is enforced, 

 although not actually required by the regulations. 

 (2) Of seven candidates for the Honours stage that 

 have come under my observation, only three have 

 passed the second stage, and of them two were ladies 

 who certainly possessed no extraordinary knowledge 

 of botany. (3) With regard to the passes being 

 regulated by the sum available for grants. I have no 

 recent statistics from which that conclusion might be 

 inferred ; but a few years ago the amount voted by 

 Parliament for the Department was ^"319,454 ioj. 

 exclusive of the Geological Survey. The amount 

 paid to teachers of Science was ,£43,519 2s. gd., 

 and to teachers of Art ^16,415, or a total of 

 ,£59,934 2s. gd, which is less than one-fifth of 

 the whole sum. In other words four shillings 

 in the pound goes into the pockets of those 

 who really do the work, while four- fifths is 

 swallowed up in centralisation, red-tape, official 

 salaries, examiners, inspectors, and printing. It 

 comes out that the little smattering of science that a 

 student gets to pass the first class of the elementary 

 stage 'costs the country ,£10, seeing that £2 is the 

 grant to the teacher. I have no doubt that later 

 statistics would show an even greater disproportion. 

 After so much has been swallowed up in expenses, 

 it follows that the number of passes must be limited 

 by the balance available for grants. (4) In my 

 opinion it is not fair that it should be easier to pass 

 in some subjects than in others, without stating in the 

 regulations which are the easy subjects. (5) Whether 

 the form goes before the examiners or not matters 

 little, but (6) the fact that age and profession are 



