The Evolution of Botany. 183 



The second botanical garden established in America was 

 that by Humphrey Marshall in West Bradford, Pennsylvania, 

 now Marshall ton. Marshall had before that indulged his 

 taste for botanical collections in cultivating useful and orna- 

 mental plants at his father's residence near the Brandywine. 

 His laudable example was not without its influence in the 

 community where he resided, and among the number of in- 

 cipient botanical gardens springing up around him, those of 

 his friends William Jackson at Londongrove and Joshua 

 and Samuel Pierce of East Marlborough, were conspicious. 



In 1810 Dr. Hosack founded a botanical garden in New 

 York upon the site now occupied by the Columbia College 

 and surroundings, but it is only a bit of history now. 



A garden was founded at Charleston, S. C., in 1804, but 

 that too is of the past. 



The one at Cambridge, laid out in 1805, was once under 

 the skillful supervision of Asa Gray. It is yet an adjunct of 

 which Cambridge is proud. 



St. Louis has a botanical garden, the Shaw Garden, found- 

 ed by Mr. Shaw privately, but lately made public. It is 

 quite extensive and growing. 



Philadelphia has her Horticultural Hall since the centen- 

 nial exhibition, and Baltimore is soon to have a garden. 



The city of New York, the metropolis of the American 

 continent, the third now, soon to be the second, city of im- 

 portance on the globe, the educational center of America, 

 the home of learning and knowledge of this country, is 

 without a botanical garden. May New York and Brooklyn 

 soon enter upon an era of botanical gardens and museums. 



In order to proceed in chronological order, let us go back 

 again to the time when botanical gardens were beginning to 

 become more numerous. The culture of foreign plants in 

 these gardens contributed not a little to the progress of bot- 

 any, but, in the same degree that botany was advancing, the 

 lack of an adequate comprehensive form of classification be- 

 came more and more felt. This want, and that for a general 

 method for nomenclature (naming of plants), resulted in 

 much confusion at times when the identity or names of 

 plants were to be determined. This obstacle to the develop- 

 ment of botany was especially annoying to Linnams, who, in 

 his endeavors to overcome this hindrance, originated a system 

 (middle of the eighteenth century) which at the time fulfilled 

 the needs admirably, and which bore his name and established 

 his renown. The system, though an artificial one, and based 



