FuRTHi^R Riisi;archi;s in DisiiASKS OF Plants 523 



why as yet lie had not " secured an epithelioma in plants." Drs. 

 J. W. Harshbcrqer and Maefarlanc were most interested, in fact 

 in 1917 llarshberger had written Smith of his interest in his " very 

 important hypothesis as to the inactivation of the inhibitors of 

 growth by the chemic products of Bacteriian tuniefaciens. I 

 believe," he said, ' that you have simplihed the problem very 

 much. \'our experiments with ammonia and other substances 

 point the way to a probable solution of some of the insurmount- 

 able obstacles in the way of the study of cancer in plants and 

 animals." In two letters he suggested various plant materials 

 with which to continue experiments. Dr. B. M. Davis of the 

 department of botany found his paper " mighty interesting." 

 "' I wish," wrote Dr. Joseph McFarland of the McManes Labora- 

 tory of Pathology of the medical school, " that I had a modicum 

 of your energy, industry and originality." The reprints were 

 " most interesting." 



Dr. A. F. Woods, now president of Maryland State College of 

 Agriculture, praised his former associate, saying: " The work you 

 have done in this field is most important and I am sure will be 

 greatly appreciated by everyone interested in the development of 

 Pathology." 



Smith, pleased with Dr. E. C. Jeffrey's new book on The 

 Anatomy of Woody Plants, promised in November 1917 to do 

 with it what now he seldom did with books — " read the whole of 

 it." Jeffrey replied, 



It is a satisfaction to find expert opinion so favorable to my book. . . . 

 I trust that you may feel encouraged to carry out your intention of reading 

 the book through, particularly as there seem to be very close connections 

 between our two fields of work. I have just been looking over your last 

 interesting contribution on the subject of plant tumors. I am pleased to 

 note that the "' new growth hypothesis of the origin of tumors " is passing 

 into the back ground because it has always seemed to be particularly absurd 

 and impossible. Your article is all the more appreciated at the present 

 time because one of my students is carrying on investigations as to the effect 

 of purely physical stimuli on hypertrophy and similar phenomena. 



On January 4, 1919, Smith reported to Dr. Cullen: 



This summer some of my experiments on begonia phyllomaniaca turned 

 out well, and I am now getting a paper - ready for publication. The plant 



* The cause of proliferation in Begonia phyllomaniaca, Proc. Nat' I Acad. Sci. 5: 

 36-37, Feb. 1919. Read Nov. 18, 1918. 



