624 



NATURE 



[October 23, 1890 



he is acquainted with the structure of the seed. Here, again, it 

 is not the details of structure of the seed-coats, the nucellus, and 

 the embryo, which differ in each seed taken, that are to tax his 

 memory and disgust his mind, but he must be made familiar with 

 the leading features common to all seeds, and illustrated by a 

 few selected examples. The nature of the seed-coats, the struc- 

 ture of the embryo and its relations to the endosperm, &c. , are 

 easily taught, if the teacher knows his art, and the pupil is 

 properly led up to his work ; otherwise, I fail to see how the 

 latter is to gain any idea of what a seed is on the one hand, or 

 of how a tree arises from the embryo on the other, and if he 

 does not understand what a seed is, he will never comprehend 

 the process of germination, and he thus misses the best chance 

 of elucidation as to the development of the complex structures of 

 the root, stem, and leaf, &c., which follow. 



I have said nothing of the phenomena of growth, moreover, 

 and yet the problems of germination will remain obscure and 

 unintelligible until the student knows something about growth ; 

 and this presupposes at least some notions as to the phenomena 

 of cell-division in the embryonic tissue, and of cell-growth and 

 development. 



Why say more ? It is obvious that these studies lead the one 

 to the other, and the real difficulty is to select the best illustra- 

 tions and use them to the best advantage. 



The forest-student's curriculum, therefore, is not to be re- 

 garded as a narrow one because he needs only a catalogue of 

 facts, but z&z. special OTL^ because the exigencies of his profes- 

 sional time demand his attention to certain classes of phenomena. 

 His early training — would that it began at school — should be in 

 the observation and comparison of plants and their organs : he 

 should then proceed to more comprehensive field-work, and 

 exercises in the description of plants and systematic botany. In 

 selecting his examples special attention should be paid to trees 

 and shrubs, which are commonly neglected by students, and the 

 lens should be always at hand. 



Studies in the elements of anatomy and histology must follow, 

 otherwise his progress will be hampered when he has to deal 

 with the subjects of germination, nutrition, growth in thickness 

 and formation of wood, cortex, bark, &c. 



Refined histology, special anatomy, and speculative morphology 

 will have to be neglected, nor must he aim at becoming a 

 specialist in taxonomy. His laboratory work must be directed 

 to the end that he may understand the general structure and 

 relations of tissues and organs, otherwise he cannot understand 

 what is known of their functions ; that he may have clear ideas 

 as to the parts which yield economic products, otherwise he 

 becomes lost in the long catalogue of these ; that he may grasp 

 the salient features in the structure of the different kinds of 

 wood, otherwise he cannot attempt to classify and identify them ; 

 that he may know something of the biology of fungi, other- 

 wise he cannot hope to understand the diseases of timber which 

 they cauFC, or the important scavenging and other work which 

 they perform in the forest, and so on. 



It would take too much space and time to enlarge on the pity 

 of the fact that young forest -students come up for training almost 

 totally unprepared for such a curriculum, and especially devoid 

 of the elementary knowledge and powers of observation which 

 they should have received at school : the consequence is, much 

 of their valuable probation period is occupied with acquiring the 

 elementary facts and methods without which they cannot possibly 

 make progress in more special work. Now I should like to see 

 all this altered, and the only way to effect the necessary salutary 

 changes is to have some guarantee that such probationers have a 

 suitable training in elementary botany while they are in the 

 receptive condition of school life. 



Let me now suppose the case of a young man destined for a 

 career as a brewer. No one will deny that an essential part of 

 his training" should consist in a thorough schooling in the 

 methods of cultivating and separating the various forms of 

 yeast, bacteria, and moulds which are met with in every corner 

 of a brewery, and some of which are the agents on the proper 

 action of which he depends directly, while others are his enemies 

 — for I need not remind you that the fermentation industries all 

 depend on various yeasts, and that the diseases of wine and beer, 

 &c., are due to the interfering action of other microscopic 

 organisms of the nature of yeasts, moulds, and bacteria. 



This is all clear, and generally accepted, but I am not so sure 

 that everyone recognizes the fact that the proper study of these 

 fungi and allied organisms is a department of botany ; though 

 I am quite sure that many people suppose that it is the province 



NO. IOQ5, VOL. 42] 



of the chemist to clear up the mysteries of these agents of fer- 

 mentation and putrefaction. 



It requires long practice with the microscope and with 

 botanical methods of investigation to trace the vagaries of even 

 the largest of these ferment-organisms, however ; and without 

 implying in the least that some of the methods and results of 

 modern chemistry are not essential in such investigations — for 

 the contrary is really true— I would urge the absolute necessity 

 of a botanical training before the student can grasp the meaning 

 of the problems to be solved. 



It is surely childish to reply that the special technical methods 

 of the brewer's microscopist can be acquired without the pre- 

 liminary training in botany which is here pleaded for. I know 

 they can be acquired, as merely technical processes, and I do not 

 deny that relatively good work has occasionally been done under- 

 such conditions by men of genius and industry, who have acquired 

 the botanical knowledge as they proceeded ; but the point is 

 that the technologist who has had no training in botany is found 

 groping over problems in a manner he would never have had to 

 do had he a proper view of the nature of plants and plant-life 

 such as a suitable training in the elements of botany would give 

 him. 



This training, if commenced at school with exercises on 

 observing and describing plants, and then pursued far enough 

 to give him correct ideas of structure, of the nature and grouping 

 of the histological elements, and of what is best known as to 

 their functions in the physiology of nutrition, growth, and 

 reproduction, would at least save the student from those crude 

 notions as to the so-called physics and chemistry of a yeast-cell 

 or of a fungus-hypha which one so commonly meets with. 



I am not in any sense implying that a brewer's technologist 

 should be a botanist, in the accepted meaning of the term : I 

 only urge that he has to confront problems of physiology and of 

 morphology, over and above his every-day riddles of chemistry 

 and physics ; and that even if we concede that physiological 

 actions are nothing more than complex and conditioned physical 

 and chemical actions (and I do not deny this), it is still true that 

 he should be quite clear that this implies much more than it is 

 commonly supposed to imply, and have at least an inkling of 

 what we know as to the complexity of metabolic and other 

 processes. 



Now he cannot be clear on this subject unless he knows 

 something of modern plant-physiology ; and he cannot follow 

 the teachings of physiology unless he is familiar with what is 

 best known as to the structure of plants, and their general 

 nature. How far he should go in these studies is not for me to 

 limit, but he must at least be able to grasp enough to enable 

 him to understand the progress of the science, and to see how 

 far he is justified in drawing inferences from phenomena observed 

 in other plants and applying his conclusions to the plants he is 

 studying. To attempt to study the behaviour of a yeast-cell, or 

 of a bacterium or mould, without clear ideas as to what is known 

 of the plant-cell generally, seems to me very like obstinately 

 attempting to open a lock in a dark room when you are 

 ignorant of the whereabouts of the lock and have not found 

 the right key. 



What I have said with respect to the study of ferment- 

 organisms holds good with regard to the study of what is called 

 bacteriology, and to an even greater extent. For no one is 

 likely to gainsay that such extremely difficult and delicate investi- 

 gations as those made in the domain of pathology cannot be 

 properly conducted without an intelligent acquaintance with the 

 physiology of parasitic and saprophytic fungi and bacteria, and 

 this being conceded the rest follows as a matter of course. 



Yet it is in just this region of special scientific investigation 

 that the grossest sins are committed. It is pitiable to see the 

 wild struggles with facts that have been carried on in the name 

 of bacteriology, and which might have been avoided had the 

 investigators been properly trained in botanical science. 



Bacteriology, however, is only one special branch of what is 

 popularly known as the study of germs, and the truth of what 

 has been above stated comes out with yet more startling clearness 

 when we recognize the benefits that have arisen from the study 

 of parasitic fungi and their relations to the diseases of plants. 

 Taking the latter as a special pursuit, it is very difficult to say 

 what should be omitted in a training designed to fit the botanist 

 for investigation. It is only quite lately that pathologists have 

 clearly recognized that the study of the diseases of plants (sa 

 important to horticulturists, planters, and foresters) implies by 

 no means a mere acquaintance with the forms of funji and their 



