64 



THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 



e.g., that of Bentham— and others which, as Prof. Oliver says in 

 his introduction, we should have expected to find.} The omission 

 of Darwin is explained by reference to the centenary volume 

 published by the same Press, but its absence gives a sense of 

 incompleteness to the book. Had the contents of the volume been 

 limited to the botanists who formed the texts for the ten lectures 

 delivered at University College in 1911, their restriction would 

 have appeared more reasonable, but the addition of others renders 

 it difficult to understand on what principle the selection has been 

 made, though we gladly allow that some of these additions are 

 among the most interesting chapters of the book. 



The following list from the Introduction indicates both the 



subjects of the 

 biographies : — 

 "Kobert Morison 

 ::: John Eay 

 :,: Nehemiah Grew 

 "Stephen Hales 



John Hill 

 "Eobert Brown 

 "Sir William Hooker 

 : "Bev. J. S. Henslow 



John Lindley . 

 "William Griffith . 

 "Arthur Henfrey 

 *W. H. Harvey 



Eev. M. J. Berkeley 



Sir Joseph Gilbert . 

 "W. C. Williamson . 



H. Marshall Ward . 



book and the order and authorship of the 



1620-1683. 

 1627-1705. 

 1641-1712. 

 1677-1761. 

 1716-1775. 

 1773-1858. 

 1785-1865. 

 1796-1861. 

 1799-1865. 

 1810-1845. 

 1819-1858. 

 1811-1866. 

 1803-1889. 

 1817-1901. 

 1816-1895. 

 1854-1905. 



Prof. Vines. 



Mrs. Arber. 



Francis Darwin. 



T. G. Hill. 



Prof. Farmer. 



Prof. Bower. 



Prof. Henslow. 



Prof. Keeble. 



Prof. Lang. 



Prof. F. W. Oliver. 



R. LI. Praeger. 



George Massee. 



Prof. Bottomley. 



Dr. Scott. 



Sir W. Thiselton-Dyer. 



Prof. Balfour. 



Prof. Bower. 



The Edinburgh Professors 1670-1887. 

 f Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker 1817-1911. 



These names give but an imperfect notion of the contents of the 

 book, for the authors, in many cases, have devoted attention to 

 botanists associated personally or from a literary standpoint with 

 the main subjects of the notices. This is naturally especially the 

 case in the earlier portion ; it was impossible to discuss the work 

 of Morison and Bay without some reference to those who had pre- 

 ceded them in attempting methods of classification, and the 

 influence of Cesalpino, Bauhin, and Jung is recognized. Grew's 

 indebtedness to Hooke, which the former duly acknowledged, is 

 pointed out ; and, to take an example from the later biographies, 

 fuller information (accompanied by a charming portrait) than has 

 hitherto been published is given concerning Henry Witham, " the 

 first Englishman," says Dr. Scott, " to investigate the internal 



* These were subjects of lectures in the University course. 



t Sir Joseph Hooker's name is omitted from the list of contents given on 

 p. 2 of the volume. 



J He also thinks that the absence of "special reference to the work of 

 Priestley, Cavendish and Setiebicr" "will not escape criticism": but what 

 should a Frenchman do dans cette galere? 



