BOTANICAL GAZETTE. 15 



become of them will appreciate this fact. But still species are describ- 

 ed by botanists with a limited collection ot plants, a still more limited 

 library and sometimes even with no proper conception of what consti- 

 tutes a species. Any one may get the credit of describing a new 

 species authoritativelv by referring it to competent authorities, upon 

 whom after all will fall the burden of the work in deciding its genuine- 

 ness. Many forms are now enjoying the pleasure of a name "for a 

 season," and many a species in this and other countries is bear- 

 ing two or more names, and only waiting for the question of priority 

 to be settled. 



Mr. F. Kitton in Science- Gossip describes the method of stain- 

 ing vegetable tissues practised as early as 1774. We give it for the 

 benefit of some of our friends who are laboring over the preparation 

 of beautiful slides, as containing some hint that may be of service. 

 "Dissolve one drachm of sugar of lead in one ounce and a half of 

 water; filter the material. A stem, or piece of a small branch of a 

 tree is to be immersed upright for half its length in this solution, and 

 covered with a glass to prevent evaporation, and allowed to remain 

 two days in it; Cut off the part immersed and throw away. Place 

 the remaining piece in orpiment lixivium (which is thus prepared). 

 Place in a basin two ounces of quicklime and an ounce of orpiment; 

 pour upon them one pint and a half of boiling water. When it has 

 stood a day and a half, it is fit for use. By this process a deep brown 

 stain is produced." This is tak^n from a work on "The Construction 

 of Timber from its Early Growth, explained by the microscope and 

 proved from experiments in a great variety of Kinds. By John Hill, 



I774-" 



There are, and may be always will be. two classes of workers 

 with the microscope. The one class have the microscope itself for an 

 end. and to these the euphonious name microscopist is usually applied. 

 As they have in view continually the perfection of the instrument and 

 all its appliances they naturally run to large and complicated stands 

 with an endless array of accessories. There are the best of reasons 

 for everything they use and they obtain the best of results. The other 

 class consider the microscope simply as a means and have made the 

 science of biology what it is to day. But it is a strange fact that these 

 workers always (we speak now strictly of botanical workers) use the 

 simpler instruments and fewer appliances. The great laboratories of to- 

 day, those which are furnishing the material for books and are filling our 

 scientific periodicals with the results of their work, are equipped with 

 very simple instruments. Does it follow that if such work can be 

 done by ordinary instruments even more astonishing results can be ob- 

 tain by using finer ones? Or is it a fact that the extra appliances, etc., 

 are more things of "fuss and feathers" than fruitful additions to bio- 

 logical laboratories ? A discussion is now going on in the Am. Month- 

 ly Micr. Journal concerning the relative value of large and small mi- 

 croscopes, the reading of which suggests to the working biologist some 

 such thoughts as the above. 



