16G 



account 



New 



Phytologist 9 ' ill 19] 1. Simultaneously he collaborated with 

 Professor Priestley in an investigation on a bacterial disease of 

 swedes, the results of which were published in the " Journal of 

 Agricultural Science " in 1910. In Paris he undertook the 

 examination of certain fungi obtained from the Cote d'lvoire, 

 by Chevalier, and published descriptions of two forms, Pion- 

 notes viridis and Peristomium desmosporum , nov. spec, in the 

 "Comptes liendus" in 1912 and the "Bulletin de la Societe 

 myeologique de France " in 1913. His main achievement for 

 science, however, was the development of the school of biology and 

 the equipment of laboratories amid the almost insuperable diffi- 

 culties of the camp at Ruhleben. The extent of the service which 

 he rendered there can only be fully appreciated by those who 

 worked with him during those four full years; but by them his 

 enthusiasm for science and stimulating influence will never be 

 forgotten and through them the value of his work will be passed 

 on. 



To those of us who were privileged to have been associated 

 with him in his scientific work there -remains a sense of loss 

 greater even from the personal than the scientific point of view. 



and led him to the accomplishment of what must be regarded 

 as the great work of his all-too-brief life, which earned for him 

 the love and devotion of all his fellows there. 



The story of the stern years at Ruhleben may be more fitly 

 left to be told by those who were his companions during that 

 time. One need only note here, that, notwithstanding the 

 appalling trials and surroundings, and -handicapped by more or 

 ]ess continuous ill-health, he succeeded, as he always did, in I 



extracting the most and the best out of life and at the end was 

 able to look back upon it as the finest portion of his career and, 

 in his own words, as by far the shortest four years which he 

 had ever spent. 



He was able to return to England early last December and after 

 a brief holiday started work at Long Ashton at the beginning 

 of Februarv. Within a week he contracted a severe chill. 

 Pneumonia supervening, he succumbed after a few days' illness. 



His death causes a gap in the ranks of the young biologists 

 of this country at a time when men of his calibre are most needed. 

 It is given to few men of his years to attain the same degree 

 of proficiency in his special subject and with it to possess the 

 impelling personality which marked him out for a foremost 

 place in whatever field of action he chose to select. 

 Ruhleben provided him with his opportunity and revealed him 

 as a leader among men. Ruhleben also has shown the measure 

 of the loss science has sustained. 



In his brief career, almost entirely spent in preparatory work, 

 the volume of achievement in the way of original investigations 

 was necessarily small; but he was able, nevertheless, to publish 

 a short series of mycological papers embodying the results of 

 his work in Bristol and Paris, which indicate his aptitude for 

 research and his wide range of knowledge. At Bristol he was 

 largely occupied with a study of the methods of reproduction in 





