March 4, 18 75 J 



NATURE 



347 



really originated there, and were not derived from tlic 

 pollen." 



Equally deplorable would be the result of affirming with 

 Dr. Brown (p. 230) that " Turnip leaves contain 3 to 10 

 per cent, [of silica], oat 11 to 58 per cent, (especially in 

 the stem), lettuce 20 per cent., oak-leaves 31 per cent., 

 and beech-leaves 26 per cent." 



It is unjust to the memory of Grew to assert that he 

 ever disputed the discovery of the sexuality of flowering 

 plants with Millington. Anyone who will refer to Grew's 

 " Anatomy of Plants," p. 171, will see that he does perfect 

 justice to Millington. 



We had noted down a number of other passages equally 

 open to criticism, but it is sincerely to be hoped in the 

 interests of real botanical study that the specimens of this 

 book which have been given will have some deterrent 

 effect upon its possible readers. It is in vain that the 

 author assures us that he has perused, for the purpose of 

 his book, no less than 1,200 papers in almost every Euro- 

 pean language. A tithe of this literature properly selected 

 and properly digested would have produced a manual of 

 some value, instead of a mere chaotic dust-heap of all 

 kinds of views belonging to all kinds of authors, as if 

 scientific literature were in a way canonical, and the date 

 of an author's views made no sort of difference, a common 

 authenticity — like inspiration — embracing them all. 



The blunders in the names of plants all through the,book 

 are quite as remarkable as the ^statements, about their 

 structure. Chamccoparinus (p. loi) is something more 

 than a misprint for Chamcecyparissus, and it is astonish- 

 ing to read about the " Brownouian" movements in a 

 book whose author bears the honoured name of Robert 

 Brown. 



OUR BOOK SHELF 



Telerrapk and Travel. By Colonel Sir F. J. Goldsmid, 

 C.B., K.C.S.I., &c. (London : Macmillan and Co., 

 1874.) 

 During the time of the late Bengal famine we were 

 familiarised with seeing in the morning papers tele- 

 grams that had been despatched from Calcutta on the 

 previous evening. Ten years ago telegraphic conmiuni- 

 cation with India was but just completed viA Constanti- 

 nople, the Persian Gulf, and Karachi : but it was some 

 years after that before rapid through communication was 

 arranged. The delays occurred mostly between Persia 

 and England, and much organisation of European lines 

 was needed before it was possible to converse with 

 Teheran as the Shah did on his arrival at Buckingham 

 Palace. 



Those who are interested in the subject of telegraphic 

 communication with our Indian Empire (and who is not?) | 

 will find much information in Sir F. J. Goldsmid's " Tele- 

 graph and Travel." He gives an account of the origin 

 and development of the schemes, the troublesome dipio- | 

 matic delays, and the physical difficulties that had to be | 

 overcome, as well as the arrangements that had to be 

 made in some districts to protect the overland lines from 

 destruction by wandering tribes. An officer of experience 

 among Turks of Europe and Asia expressed his opinion 

 at the outset that every convention with the Arabs in the 

 interest of telegraph companies would be uncertain of 

 execution, and that all wire within reach would be torn 

 down from the poles to make heel-ropes for their horses. 

 Instances of wilful damage unhappily were found by \ 

 experience to be not rare, so that in some districts 



mountedlguards were needed along wide tracts addine 

 of course, considerably to the working cost of the lines 



The first part of the book the author feels is likely to 'be 

 "found pamfully practical and matter of fact over- 

 burdened with oflicial details and waiU-ng in the zest 

 which keeps the eye willingly open and the hand steady 

 to the book," and he pleads in excuse " the necessarily 

 monotonous character of the subject." The accomplish- 

 ment of such a communication between the two countries, 

 however, is so momentously important an event, that the 

 history of its progress is of interest, however it is told. 

 Sir F. J. Goldsmid's arrangement of his materials certainly 

 does make it rather difficult to follow the thread of the 

 history, but then it is enlivened with many interesting 

 little sketches, descriptions of Persian diplomatists, their 

 manner of conducting business, and so forth. 



The first part of the book is illustrated with two maps 

 which indicate the route of the different telegraphic lines 

 between England and India, the dates being affixed to 

 the different sections. Sir F. J. Goldsmid writes from 

 his own experiences and from blue books, and gives a 

 mass of information which could not v/ell be compiled by 

 anyone not practically acquainted with the work. 



LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 



[The Editor does not hold himself responsible for opinions expressed 

 by his correspondents. Neither can he undertake to nltirn, 

 or to correspond vjiih the -uriteis cf rejected manusni/ts. 

 No notice is taken oj anonymous communications.'] 

 Sir J. Herschel on the Endowment of Research 

 The following extract from a letter from Sir Juhn Herschel 

 bears so directly on the distinction between the needs of iheorttical 

 and practical science insisted on in your recent leading article 

 (vol. xi. p. 301), that I need ofierno apology for communicating it. 

 As the present value of the opinions which it expresses is in- 

 trinsic, it is unnecessary to particularise the circumstances under 

 which the letter was written more than tliiity years ago. But I 

 may remark that it is supported by mcny passages in oti.er letters 

 in which the distinction in question, and that between research 

 which can and researcli which cannot be readily eflected by 

 private means, is dwelt on (with all the scrupulous care of one 

 than whom no responsible guardian of the public purse was ever 

 more opposed to dependence on State aid as a prnciple), in a 

 sense emphatically favourable to the demands of science for help 

 in certain clearly indicated directions. I am sorry that I hiv<: 

 not the papers at hand to quote from, but one iiiitanco in 

 particular occurs to me, in which the extending an j perfcctiiu' oi 

 various Physical Tables in a thoroughly satisfactory manner is 

 declared to be altogether outside of the field of work of the 

 individual investigator, and to be labour to be paid for by the 

 community. J. H. 



Biarritz, Feb. 22 



"... There is a remark which possibly it may be deeired 

 presumptuous in me to make, relative to the general subject of 

 scientific expenditure touched on [in your letter], but which I 

 trust may be pardoned, as I have reason to believe my impres- 

 sions on the subject are those of the whole body of British men 

 of science, with hardly an exception. Large as tlie sum 

 expended on objects officially classed as ' scientific ' may appear 

 it would not, I think, be considered as excessive if devutcd 

 to the prosecution of scientific objects in the highest and strictest 

 sense of that word. I mean sucli as would be reconimendtd fur 

 prosecution by men of science the most eminent, each in his 

 several department, and responsible for their recommendations 

 to the opinion of the public and of the scientific world. Under 

 such objects I should certainly not include hydro^raphical, 

 industrial, or military surveys, experiments merely technical, or 

 many other objects, which, however indisputably necessary and 



