ZOOLOGY AND BOTANY 69 



from Darwin's time, when we find that down to 1867 

 botany was represented in the chair of the Association 

 only by the versatile Daubeny (1856), and zoology 

 only by Owen (1858). Daubeny was no less eminent 

 as chemist and geologist than as botanist : in fact he 

 carried on his shoulders more than his share of the 

 burden of natural science in the unscientific Oxford 

 of his day. But the chair of the Association missed 

 the honour of having as an occupant Robert Brown 

 (1773-1858), by general consent one of the greatest 

 of British botanists, in whose work is found the basis 

 of much fine work of later years in the classification 

 of plants which replaced the Linnaean system. Owen 

 was a man capable of lifting his science higher into 

 general notice than the botanists of his time did 

 theirs : he was a man of affairs, able to take advantage, 

 for instance, of the new interest in science at Court 

 engendered by the Prince Consort (who, it may be 

 observed, followed him immediately in the presidency 

 of the Association). His services to the observational 

 side of zoology were in some measure obscured by 

 his opposition to Darwin, and were at least equalled 

 by his powers of organisation : during his period 

 as superintendent of the Department of Natural 

 History in the British Museum the building in South 

 Kensington was opened (1881). 



On Darwin's revolutionary influence upon public 

 interest in science it is needless to insist further : 

 his demonstration of the grand common interests of 

 science itself is typified, in a measure, by the diversity 

 of the labours of three great men who were united in 

 the championship of his cause, themselves leaders in 

 three different branches of science Lyell in geology, 

 Hooker in botany, Huxley in zoology : Hooker (to 



