July 13, 191 1] 



NATURE 



37 



still, for there come times when one partner in such 

 an enterprise cannot advance without the other. No 

 wonder the book stopped at the end of the first 

 volume. 



For many years Tait was the general secretary of 

 the Royal Society of Edinburgh, and of the 365 papers, 

 the titles of which are enumerated in Dr. Knott's 

 bibliography, by far the greater number were com- 

 munications to the society's Proceedings or Trans- 

 actions. Unlike most secretaries of learned societies, 

 he was himself the most prolific contributor. 



He never joined the Royal Society of London, 

 though he was a royal medallist in 1886, and was 

 often asked to allow his name to be submitted. In- 

 deed, his heart was in Edinburgh and his work there. 

 For the last twenty-five years of his life he never 

 crossed the Tweed ; the only occasions on which he 

 left the city were his visits to St. Andrews, ten days 

 in spring and six weeks in autumn, with one excep- 

 tion, when he went to Glasgow to deliver a lecture on 

 thunderstorms. 



Though not himself a great golfer, he was the 

 recognised authority on the physics of the game. His 

 explanations of the "carry" of a golf ball, of the 

 action of toeing, heeling and slicing, all examples of 

 his theory of the effect of spin, stood the severe test 

 of his own experiments, and are beyond cavil. His 

 papers on this subject — in Nature and elsewhere — 

 would form an interesting book on the dynamics of 

 a spherical projectile in air, if they were collected. 



Failing health, and the death of his son, Lieut. 

 F. G. Tait, the great amateur golfer, at Koodoosberg 

 in 1000, brought the toil of his strenuous life to a 

 close. But at the last, only two days before his 

 death, he was busy with his beloved quaternions, and 

 wrote a sheet of notes of investigations on the linear 

 vector function. 



This notice is already too long, and yet nothing 

 has been said of Tait's work on thermoelectricity, on 

 mirage, or of "The Unseen Universe," and the 

 "Paradoxical Philosophy." The two last-mentioned 

 works, written in conjunction with Balfour Stewart, 

 are interesting as an attempt to apply the principle of 

 continuity to infer, and to some extent explain, the 

 existence of an unseen system of things to which in 

 some sort we stand in physical relation. Incidentally 

 they show the strong yet unobtrusive religious faith of 

 their authors. A. G. 



AUSTRALIAN PLANTS. 

 Australian Plants Suitable for Gardens, Parks, Timber 

 Reserves, &=c. By \Y. R. Guilfoyle. Pp. 47S. 

 (Melbourne and London : Whitcombe and Tombs, 

 Ltd., n.d.) Price 155. net. 



THIS work, prepared, as we learn, at the request 

 of a special committee, embodies the practical 

 experience of its author during the past thirtv-six 

 years. Except for some five-and-twenty pages of pre- 

 liminary matter, the book is not one that admits of 

 being read. But this fact in no way detracts from 

 its merits as a work of reference, or lessens the debt 

 lo Mr. Guilfoyle of Australians who care either for 

 gardening or for Australian plants. The feeling, its 

 NO. 2176, VOL. 87] 



author explains, which has inspired its publication, is 

 a desire to arouse increased enthusiasm in regard to 

 the native species. The introduction should at any rate 

 have the effect of directing the attention of his com- 

 patriots to the fact that Australia is richly endowed 

 with what is wonderful and beautiful in the vegetable 

 kingdom. If it does have this effect, it will have 

 well served its purpose, since all that can be needed 

 to evoke the enthusiasm which is desired is some 

 intelligent attention to the plants themselves. 



Granted the existence of such enthusiasm the work 

 before us must prove invaluable in guiding and con- 

 trolling it. That some control will be needed an 

 examination of Mr. Guilfoyle's lists abundantly 

 shows. The value of the lists for this purpose is 

 enhanced by the self-restraint which has enabled the 

 author to confine to a couple of lines references to 

 individual plants which those who are not themselves 

 Australians would gladly have seen expanded to as 

 many pages. 



It is scarcely strange that the inhabitants of an 

 autonomous State like the Australian Commonwealth 

 should be less enthusiastic over their native plants 

 than the inhabitants of Britain. The wattles and 

 gums, the myrtles and honeysuckle trees, the 

 Boronias, Brachycomes, and Epacrids of Australia 

 do not yet arouse feelings and memories so keen as 

 those aroused by the oak and thorn and gorse, the 

 primrose or the daisy or the heather of Britain. 

 There is, however, more than the mere absence of 

 literary allusion or historical association to account 

 for the fact. In Australia the number of forms 

 capable of awakening interest or provoking admira- 

 tion is so immeasurably greater than in Britain that 

 the observer's attention is distracted. Even where, in 

 spite of greater or less botanical differences, the plant- 

 forms of the two countries are sufficiently alike to be 

 comparable from an aesthetic point of view, as, for 

 example, in the case of the Epacrids or Australian 

 heaths and our familiar ling, the manifest superiority 

 of the Australian plants scarcely suffices to produce 

 the expected effect. Perhaps the fact that the enthu- 

 siasm of the Australian has to be extended to a dozen 

 different forms, while we can concentrate ours on one 

 or two, may be some explanation. Should Mr. Guil- 

 foyle's own enthusiasm enable his fellow-countrymen 

 to overcome this difficulty, he may truly be said to 

 have deserved well of the Commonwealth. 



The attempt made in a special list to bring some 

 order out of the chaos which prevails in respect of 

 the common names applied to Australian Eucalypts in 

 different parts of the country, deserves especial atten- 

 tion. How great the prevailing confusion is will be 

 readily appreciated if the Eucalyptus names recorded 

 in Mr. Gerth van Wijks's "Dictionary" be examined. 

 Mr. Guilfoyle's courage in endeavouring to deal with 

 this troublesome question compels our admiration. It 

 is perhaps too much to expect that everyone all over 

 Australia will be willing to abandon the use of names 

 to which thev personally have become accustomed, 

 and to be guided by what, after all, must at best be 

 a somewhat eclectic set of substitutes. But if in this 

 particular matter it can scarcely be hoped that Mr. 

 Guilfovle's action will receive the universal approval 



