The President's Address. By Wm. Carruthers. 135 



in August 1674. Malpighi's ' Idea ' ia a clear and succinct statement 

 of the work which he promised to submit to the Society in detail lor 

 their judgment. No illustrations were sent with the ' Idea.' 



Having begun a work which had met with so much favour from 

 the Society, Grew resolved to prosecute it further, and drew up a de- 

 tailed scheme of hi? whole design. Hearing, however, from London 

 that Malpighi had entered on the same work, and considering that 

 the Society had the prospect of a memoir from so illustrious a man, he 

 stayed his hand. 



So important, however, did Grew's work on plants appear to the 

 Royal Society, that on the 18th April, 1672, on the recommendation 

 of Dr. Wilkins, he was appointed the Society's Curator of the Anatomy 

 of Plants for a year, for which he was to receive fifty pounds, to be 

 obtained by a subscription from " such members as should be willing 

 to contribute that sum." The Bishop of Chester agreed to take 

 charge of the subscriptions. 



When his friend the Bishop of Chester informed him of this, and 

 of the Society's desire that he should proceed with his researches, he 

 resolved to continue his work, " considering that it would be no dis- 

 advantage to the credit of those matters, which were so new and 

 strange, to be offered to the world from a double authority." He 

 removed to London, and established himself tbere as a physician. 



He again took up the scheme of work he had set aside, and on 

 the 9th and 15th of January, 1672-3, he submitted to the Society 

 his ' Idea of a Phytological History Propounded,' and continued his 

 researches on the Anatomy of Plants by describing in detail the 

 structure and functions of the Root. These two papers were ordered 

 to be printed, and were published as another small octavo volume in 

 1673, containing 144 pages and 7 plates. 



The purpose of the ' Phytological History ' was very different 

 from Malpighi's 'Idea.' Grew was groping after a philosophical 

 basis for the classification of plants. He considered that five points 

 should be kept in view for this purpose : — (1) a particular and com- 

 parative survey of whatever is of more external consideration ; (2) a 

 similar survey of the anatomy ; (3) of the contents of plants ; (4) of 

 the principles of the organised parts ; and (5) a survey of those bodies 

 from which these principles are derived. If we look at these sugges- 

 tions from the point of view of the middle of the seventeenth century, 

 we see that Grew had advanced views of what had to be considered in 

 constructing a scientific classification of plants. His five points were 

 the environment of the plants, the structure of all their ,parts, their 

 properties, the elements of which they are composed, and the sources 

 from which these elements were obtained. His own estimate of his 

 work is given in the closing sentences of the ' Idea,' which I may 

 here quote : — " This is the design," he says, " and these the means I 

 propose in order thereunto. To which, I suppose, they may all 

 appear to be necessary. For what we obtain of Nature, we must not 



