October 23, 1890] 



NATURE 



621 



merely by the amount or kind of information imparted. It does 

 not matter whether the child learns the trivial facts mentioned 

 above, or not, but it is of the highest importance that the child 

 be taught how to obtain knowledge by such direct observation 

 and comparison ; and the beauty of it all is that, as is well 

 known, the child will retain most of such information as mere 

 matter of course. 



For the main purpose in hand, therefore, it may be contended 

 that any objects would do. 



This is no doubt true in one sense, but it should not be forgotten 

 that (l) the mental exercise on the part of the child is best ex- 

 erted on natural objects^ to say nothing of the admitted advant- 

 ages of familiarizing him with Nature, and (2) the parts of 

 plants are so varied, so beautiful, and so common, that he need 

 never lack materials for his simple and pleasant work. More- 

 over, the parts of plants are clean, light, and easily handled — 

 practical advantages which recommend themselves. 



I feel convinced that, if the teachers were not opposed to it, 

 the subject would ere now have been more widely taught ; and 

 I shall therefore say a few words in anticipation of difficulties. 

 It has been suggested that materials would be scarce in winter. 

 Not at all. Let the children be familiarized with the observa- 

 tion and comparison of the peculiarities of a sprig of holly as 

 contrasted with one of ivy ; or let them be shown how different 

 are the buds and leafless shoots of the beech from those of the 

 oak or the horse-chestnut. Show them how to observe the 

 bud-scales, how to infer the leaf-arrangement from the scars, 

 how to notice the colour, roughness, markings, &c., of the peri- 

 derm. Or give them introductory notions as to the nature of a 

 hyacinth-bulb as contrasted with a potato-tuber, confining their 

 attention to points which they can make out by observation. 

 Every nut or orange or apple that a child eats might be made 

 interesting if teachers would dare step over the traces of con- 

 vention, and introduce such ostensibly dangerous articles into 

 class-work — and why not ? The doctrine of rewards and punish- 

 ments is applied more crudely than this in most children's 

 schools ! 



Be this as it may, there is no lack of material at any season, 

 for children to observe and compare, plant in hand, the pecu- 

 liarities of shape, colour, insertion, markings, &c., of the 

 leaves, stems, roots, and other parts. The difficulties are sup- 

 posed to increase when the flower is reached : this is not neces- 

 sarily the case in the hands of a sympathetic teacher, unless the 

 choice of flowers is very unfortunate and limited. 



There is one danger to be avoided here, however. Young 

 children should not be troubled with the difficulties of theoretical 

 morphology : they should be made familiar with the more obvious 

 roots, stems, leaves, tendrils, thorns, flowers, bulbs, tubers, &c., as 

 such, and comparatively, and not forced to concern themselves with 

 such ideas as that the flower is a modified shoot, the bulb a bud, 

 the tendril a leaf or branch, &c., until they have learned simply 

 to observe and compare accurately. Later on, of course, the 

 step must be taken of rousing their minds to the necessity of 

 drawing further conclusions from their comparative observations 

 in addition to recording and classifying them ; but if the teacher 

 is really capable of teaching, it will be found that the children 

 begin to suggest these conclusions themselves, and, this stage 

 once reached, the success of the method is insured. 



Glimpses of the meanings of adaptations of structure to func- 

 tion soon follow, but they should be obvious and simple at first, 

 and the mistake should not be made of entangling a child in a 

 discussion as to more remote meanings. It should never be 

 forgotten, in fact, that the first steps consist in learning to 

 observe accurately and to record faithfully, comparative exercise 

 being used in addition, both as a check and as a stimulus to the 

 judgment. 



The next step is to introduce the methods of the systematic 

 botanist who works in the field, with flower in one hand and 

 lens in the other; and the necessary preliminary and accom- 

 paniment of this is to exercise the tyro in describing common 

 plants as a whole. The value of such training in the field can 

 scarcely be over-estimated. As education it is excellent, for it 

 inculcates neatness and accuracy of method, keenness of observa- 

 tion and judgment, and is, moreover, interesting to the young 

 student, as well as healthy in every sense of the word. As 

 preliminary training in all cases where the student will have to 

 pursue the higher branches of botany, or other science, at a 

 University or a technical institution, it is absolutely necessary. 

 There is no need to enlarge on its value to the traveller, the 

 philosopher, and even the dilettante who enjoys Nature in his 



garden, or in the country, or even merely as a reader of books 

 on natural history : just think what enjoyment such a training 

 would add to the lives of thousands who have read Darwin's 

 works imperfectly, and reflect for a moment on what such 

 intelligent appreciation of such writings means to a nation 

 like ours. 



{2) The necessities of the higher academic study demand pre- 

 vious acquaintance with \\\e. fades of a large number of plants — 

 Cryptogams as well a> Phanerogams —and it is on this account 

 advisable also that the student has been well trained in field- 

 work : he should, then, be familiar with terms and groups, and 

 be able to observe and compare. 



Two chief lines of instruction are open at once to the advanced 

 student, and the first point for discussion is, how far they should 

 be kept separate or together : they are morphology and physio- 

 logy, for, say what we will, the two are separate studies in their 

 aims and methods. 



It is not improbable that the study of pure morphology may 

 be carried too far, as an independent study, and that one-sided 

 views of the nature of plants and their parts may result ; but, 

 however true this may be, I take it no botanist will deny that 

 every student should know something of the attainments and 

 aims of modern morphology. If this is admitted, the next point 

 is not likely to be gainsaid — namely, that the study of morpho- 

 logy depends on the study of anatomy and histology, as well as 

 upon that of external form. As we shall see, the same is true, 

 bat in a diffisrent way, of physiology ; but I am concerned at 

 present with morphology only. 



It seems to me, in view of these facts, that the advanced 

 teaching must presume an acquaintance with the elements of 

 anatomy and histology ; and here, again, I am convinced that if 

 teachers fully recognized how clean, and light, and easily acces- 

 sible the material is, and how excellent the training of hand and 

 eye on the one side, and of the thinking powers on the other 

 may be made, the difficulties of introducing this elementary 

 laboratory work even into secondary schools would be overcome. 



It has been overcome in many cases with regard to chemistry, 

 and there is no reason why it should not be overcome with 

 regard to botany. 



However, be it as advanced work at school, or as elementary 

 work at college, the student who proposes to pass on to the 

 higher academic study of botany must face the truth that even 

 an extensive knowledge of the outside forms of plants will not 

 carry him far on the road to be traversed. 



Now comes the question hard to answer — Should he study 

 anatomy and histology by selecting the best known and clearest 

 tissues, tissue-elements, &c., from any part of the vegetable 

 kingdom ; or should he choose some one plant, and explore the 

 recesses of its structure as thoroughly as possible ? 



All things considered, I believe the introduction is best 

 effected by the latter method, and for the following reasons. 

 In spite of the drawback that no one plant can be found which 

 shows every tissue or tissue-element at its best, one finds that, by 

 exploring the structure of some one plant as thoroughly as 

 possible, the thoughtful student obtains a better idea of the co- 

 relations of the structural elements than if he seeks for xylem 

 vessels in Maize, sieve-tubes in Cucurbita, collenchyma in one 

 plant, sclerenchyma in another, and so on. 



Moreover, the comparative survey can be better carried out, 

 if time permits, by methods such as I advocate. 



The next consideration is the selection of the type to be used 

 as a basis. In spite of all its defects, and in anticipation of 

 severe criticism, I maintain that the fern is, on the whole, the 

 most useful and convenient type for the purpose. 



No Thallophyte is sufficiently obviously complex in structure 

 to give the student the necessary ideas of co-relations of parts 

 and division of labour ; moreover, the lower forms offer peculiar 

 difficulties of observation, cultivation, &c. The moss is too 

 specialized for some purposes, and not sufficiently complex for 

 others. The Phanerogams, on the other hand, although they 

 present the vegetative tissues, members, &c., in the more highly 

 developed and specialized forms familiar to physiology, offer 

 such stumbling-blocks to the tyro in morphology that no one 

 will serve as a suitable type. The pine is the best of those pro- 

 posed, but even it presents great difficulties to a beginner. 



The disadvantages of the fern (taking Aspidium) embrace the 

 following : its roots are fine, the stem is short, and the vascular 

 bundles belong to an out-of-the-way type ; the spores take a 

 long time germinating, and the prothallus offers difficulties in 

 the way of investigation not easily overcome by a school-boy. 



NO. 1095, VOL. 42] 



