190 



PIONEERS OF SCIENCE IN AMERICA. 



such genera as JKosa J Quercus, and Trifolium have had a com- 

 mon origin a view the correctness of which no well-informed 

 botanist of our day can possibly doubt Rafinesque then main- 

 tained against the combined indignation and disgust of all his 

 fellow-workers. ** New species and new genera," he said, " are 

 continually produced by derivation from existing forms." 

 His writings on these subjects read better to-day than when, 

 fifty years ago, they were sharply reviewed by one of our then 

 young and promising botanists, Dr. Asa Gray. 



But the botanists had good reason to complain of the ap- 

 plication of Rafinesque's theories of evolution. To him the 

 production of a new species was a rapid process a hundred 

 years was time enough and when he saw tendency in diverg- 

 ing varieties toward the formation of new species, he was eager 

 to anticipate Nature (and his fellow-botanists as well), and 

 give it a new name. He became a monomaniac on the subject 

 of new species. He was uncontrolled in this matter by the in- 

 fluence of other writers that incredulous conservatism as to 

 another's discoveries which furnishes a salutary balance to en- 

 thusiastic workers. Before his death so much had he seen, and 

 so little had he compared, that he had described certainly 

 twice as many fishes, and probably nearly twice as many plants 

 and shells, as really existed in the regions over which he had 

 travelled. He once sent for publication a paper seriously de- 

 scribing, in regular natural history style, twelve new species of 

 thunder and lightning which he had observed near the Falls of 

 the Ohio. 



Then, too, Rafinesque studied in the field, collecting and 

 observing in the summer, comparing and writing in the winter. 

 When one is chasing a frog in a canebrake, or climbing a cliff 

 in search of a rare flower, he can not have a library and a mu- 

 seum at his back. The exact work of our modern museums 

 and laboratories was almost unknown in his day. Science cares 

 little for information which is not absolutely exact. Then, 

 again, he depended too much on his memory for facts and de- 

 tails; and, as Prof. Agassiz used to say, "the memory must 

 not be kept too full, or it wilt spill over." It is, moreover, 

 true that Rafinesque was very severe on other botanists, who 

 repaid his scorn with generous interest. One example will 

 serve, as told by Dr. Meehan. An interesting plant was found 

 on the Wissahickon, near Philadelphia. Dr. Kuhn, a former 



