NOTES 115 



To the Editor of " The Times " 



Sir, — Although we were unfortunately prevented from being present at 

 the demonstration on April 23, we have seen elsewhere similar demonstrations 

 by Sir J. C. Bose, and agree that the growth of plant tissues is recorded by 

 the crescograph, and that changes in the indications of the instrument record 

 when the plant is treated in such a way that its growth would naturally be 

 modified. 



We are, etc., 

 W. H. Bragg (Professor of Physics in University College, London). 

 F. W. Oliver (Professor of Botany in University College, London). 



Subsequently, at a meeting of the Royal Society, Professor Waller gave 

 an exhibition of " growth " movements in a wet violin string. Professor Sir 

 J. C. Bose was present and replied to Professor Waller's criticisms. Professor 

 Vines, of Oxford, Professor Farmer, of London, and Professors Bayliss and 

 Donnan spoke on behalf of Professor J. C. Bose. The meeting was somewhat 

 unsatisfactory and inconclusive, but the weight of evidence seemed to 

 favour Professor Bose. 



We sincerely hope that Professor Bose will continue his interesting re- 

 searches. As the President of the Royal Society remarked, apart from the 

 question of plant growth, the making of an instrument capable of magnifying 

 movements up to several million times is no mean achievement. We do 

 not know how to regard Professor Waller's interest in this discussion. While 

 we recognise clearly that new discoveries must be put to crucial tests, it will 

 be admitted by most of those who have followed the whole matter of the 

 crescograph that Professor Waller has unwittingly placed himself in a some- 

 what trying position. To clear away the obscurities surrounding this subject 

 will need further work on the interesting material unearthed by Professor 

 Bose. 



The Poet and the Phoneticians (Sir R. Ross) 



That excellent body the Society for Pure English, of which I have the 

 honour to be a member, has issued as its Tract No. II an essay on English 

 Homophones by the Poet Laureate (Clarendon Press). Homophones are 

 different words which have the same sound, such as air, ere, e'er, and heir, and 

 Mr. Bridges gives a list of them and some pertinent remarks about them. He 

 thinks that the frequency of them is a sign of degeneracy in the language ; 

 but, in my opinion, this fear is rather exaggerated. They really cause little 

 confusion in the spoken language, because, even if the context does not 

 enlighten us, we are always at hand to explain ourselves — as in the case 

 of the good lady who got a little sun and air at Brighton. Bufthey are a 

 plague in the written language ; and even Mr. Bridges does not seem to 

 have fully grasped the fact that they are the chief cause of the extremely 

 irregular spelling of our monosyllables, and therefore of the agonies of millions 

 of children from London to San Francisco and farther. For the constructors 

 of our curious orthography — which is really much more efficient than our 

 spelling-reformers would have us believe — rightly held that in script, where 

 there is no one at hand to explain, much error might be caused by spelling 

 homophones in the same way. For example, how would Shelley have written 

 the verse about Ivlilton — 



. . . but his clear sprite 

 Yet reigns o'er earth ; the third among the sons of light ; 



or Dryden the line describing the Trojan fleet 



Entering with cheerful shouts the watery reign, 



