700 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



Dr. Hammond will not fly to the conclu- 

 sion that I suppose this woman to have 

 been the superior, mentally, of those re- 

 markable men. I do not myself lay so 

 much stress upon mere brain-weight as the 

 doctor does, but I simply meet his case as a 

 matter of charity, and because it is easy to 

 do so. 



One other point, and I am done for the 

 present. I shall shortly review the matter 

 at greater length in a more readable form. 

 The doctor says : " I stated . . . that 

 the human head does not grow after the 

 seventh year. . . . Instead of head" (the 

 italics are the doctor's, although he says the 

 use of them is a feminine characteristic 

 and most objectionable), " I should have 

 said brain, and then the point involved 

 would have been more correctly stated." 

 Perhaps it would have been, although that, 

 also, is questioned by competent authority, 

 but for the moment I have nothing to say 

 as to that. 



It is unfortunate, however, that a 

 " scientist " should permit himself to resort 

 to this sort of trickery in words. Perhaps 

 it would have been more exact to say brain 

 instead of head in that connection, but the 

 doctor did not say brain, and he did not 

 mean brain at that time, and until he was 

 absolutely cornered on that point. How do 

 I know ? Allow me to quote the rest of the 

 sentence in which it occurred, and which I 

 omitted before, only because I, unlike the 

 doctor, was limited as to space, and 

 thought verbosity unnecessary, not dream- 

 ing that he would resort to such a trick. 

 Here is his original sentence : " A fact 

 which is somewhat astonishing to those not 

 aware of it is, that the head of a boy or 

 girl does not grow in size after the seventh 

 year, so thai the hat that is worn at that age 

 can be worn just as well at thirty." (I re- 

 gret that I had to use italics here to call 

 the doctor's attention to his own meaning, 

 6ince he does not like italics. I do not my- 

 self ; but there are times when they seem to 

 be very necessary.) 



Now, unless the doctor is in the habit 

 of fitting his hats to his brains and not to 

 his head, this last explanation is simply a 

 bit of artful dodging, and surely unworthy 

 of any one who is in search of simple 

 truth. Helen H. Gardener. 



AN ANOMALY IN PLANT-GROWTH. 

 Editor Popular Science Monthly : 



Sir: There was to be seen in Stock- 

 bridge, Massachusetts, in 1841, and for sev- 

 eral years afterward, a vegetable phenome- 

 non which puzzled the rural observers and 

 the few professed naturalists of the county. 

 Two beech staddles, some six inches in di- 

 ameter, grew within a foot of each other. 

 About eight feet from the ground a lateral 



branch of one of them, growing tightly 

 athwart the trunk of the other, had become 

 incased by that trunk, so as to present the 

 appearance of being thrust through it. 

 Some one had cut off the absorbing stock 

 two or three feet above the surface-soil, so 

 that it hung by that lateral branch, and 

 might be easily swung to and fro, thus : 



The severed stock continued to live and 

 grow, not only above the supporting limb, 

 but between the limb and the severance below. 



It was manifest that the top of the sun- 

 dered tree was supplied through the trans- 

 verse branch in the ordinary method of up- 

 ward growth ; but not so apparent how the 

 lower portion continued its existence. If 

 by the same agency, then seemingly by a 

 reversal of the laws of vegetable circulation. 

 It would not have been strange that shoots 

 should appear on the severed stock the sec- 

 ond season after the separation, since sap 

 sufficient to start them might be retained in 

 its tissues, particularly if the excision were 

 done during the winter, which may have 

 been the fact this I do not know ; but 

 that this life should continue in the lower 

 portion for successive years, is the mys- 

 tery of the matter. I saw it during the 

 third or fourth season after the separation, 

 and can testify to life therein, though not 

 the vigor of a thrifty young tree. The sup- 

 porting trunk had increased much more 

 than its mutilated companion. This shrink- 

 age of vitality might have resulted in ulti- 

 mate death, had not further experiment 

 been precluded by the thoughtless removal 

 of both for fire-wood by an ignorant chopper. 



Will some of your learned correspond- 

 ents explain to us rural marvelers this 

 growth from downward-moving sap, or, ap- 

 parently, from no sap at all obtained di- 

 rectly from mother earth ? 



E. W. B. Canning. 



STOCKBErDGE, M ASS. 



LITERARY SCIENCE. 

 Editor Popular Science Monthly : 



Sir : In " The Popular Science Monthly " 

 for February, 1887, you say: "Everybody, 

 nearly, has been reading ' King Solomon's 

 Mines,' but perhaps not very many have 



