PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS SECTION C. 63 



SOME ASPECTS OF BOTANY IN SOUTH AFRICA AND 

 PLANT ECOLOGY IN NATAL. 



By J. W. Bews, M.A., D.Sc, 

 Professor of Botany, Natal University College, Pietermaritzburg . 



Presidential Address to Section C, delivered July 14, 1921. 



Introduction. 



Botanists, probably to a larger extent than workers in other 

 branches of science, are the product of their environment. It ha& 

 been noted more than once that the direction of many important 

 advances in Botany has been determined by the conditions sur- 

 rounding and influencing the men responsible for opening up the 

 new pathways. At one time an extended exploration trip was 

 considered the best possible training for a young botanist, and 

 though with the increasing development of laboratory work this 

 course has, during the last generation or two, not been so much 

 followed, no one is likely to deny that it proved itself of immense 

 value. It is difficult, for instance, to estimate what the world 

 owes to the fact that Darwin made the voyage in the "Beagle." 

 Church, in his recently published memoir, "Thalassiophyta," main- 

 tains that many of the leading ideas which dominated botanical 

 teaching and research from Hofmeister to Bower would have been 

 considerably modified, if the earlier continental writers, including 

 Hofmeister himself, had lived near the sea and had known more 

 about seaweeds, plants which are only now receiving the attention 

 they deserve. Be that as it may, there can be no doubt that the 

 progress of Botany is very distinctly determined by the material 

 and problems with which the leading botanists at each period are 

 brought into contact. 



Many important advances have been made along different 

 lines, and each one, for a time, has had a more or less dominating 

 influence over those who perform the important and necessary 

 work of clearing up the details. This is not to be regretted, and 

 it is, in fact, a feature which Botany shares with all other sciences. 

 After a rough trail has been broken the pathway has to be cleared. 

 It is curious, however, how the breaking of new trails often arouses 

 a considerable amount of opposition on the part of those who main- 

 tain that the only research work worth doing is that which helps 

 to open up certain main lines of development. There may be more 

 than one reason for this. Since the majority of professional 

 botanists are engaged in teaching the subject, it is necessary for 

 them to direct the attention of their students chiefly to those main 

 lines of development and difficulties which are met with that must 

 be tackled and, if possible, overcome. Research along these same 

 lines follows as a matter of course. Much of it, unfortunately, 

 consists in applying a rather complicated technique in a purely 



