NATURE 



77 



THURSDAY, MAY 30, 1872 



BOTANY IN THE OXFORD NATURAL 

 SCIENCE SCHOOL 



'X'HE merits and demerits of the " Notice by the Board 

 of Studies for the Natural Science School of the 

 University of Oxford" will by this time have been abun- 

 dantly discussed among all circles of teachers of Natural 

 Science. That the former preponderate over the latter 

 will hardly admit of a question ; and if we once more call 

 attention to the defects of the present " Notice," it is 

 only in order that, by full and free discussion, a tho- 

 roughly satisfactory scheme may be at length elaborated. 

 We have ah-eady pointed out the subordinate part which 

 Botany plays in the programme, and this defect it is our 

 present object to illustrate more at length. We imagine 

 that the object of the framers of the scheme must have been 

 to lay down in the Preliminary Honour Examination a 

 foundation which will serve to give a solid basis for any 

 superstructure that maybe raised upon it — in other words, 

 to supply the student with an adequate mental training to 

 prepare him for whatever special branch he may afterwards 

 take up. Let us see how this works in the case of Botany. 

 The Natural Sciences which will be most useful to the 

 future botanist in enabling him to gain a comprehensive in- 

 sight into his own subject, are the outlines of Animal Phy- 

 siology, Geology, and Organic Chemistry. Of not one of 

 these subjects need he necessarily possess any knowledge 

 in order to pass the Preliminary Honour Examination ; 

 but, on the other hand, must read up Mechanics, Physics, 

 and Inorganic Chemistry. It seems to us a mistake to 

 make the physical side of Science of such preponderating 

 weight in the preliminary examination, to the entire ex- 

 clusion of the biological. 



If we now turn to the Final Examination in Biology, 

 we still find that although it is specially stated that under 

 Biology are included both Zoology and Botany, yet that his 

 own special subject is still kept entirely in the background. 

 Among the " list of books recommended for use in the 

 preparation for the General Examination in Biology " are 

 a number in General Anatomy and Histology, Compara- 

 tive Anatomy, Human Physiology, Comparative Physio- 

 logy, and the General Philosophy of Biology, but not one 

 in any department of Botany, with the exception that in 

 a foot-note we are informed that under the term " General 

 and Comparative Anatomy and Histology" "vegetable 

 structures " are included. Otherwise the examination is 

 exclusively one, not in Biology, but in Animal Pliysiology 

 and the Comparative Anatomy of Animals. The works, 

 indeed, on this subject to which the intending botanist is 

 referred would require a very long course of study to 

 master. The list is so extensive, and the range so great, 

 that it must necessarily have the effect of deterring many 

 an aspirant for distinction in the Natural Science School. 



The arrangements under the special subject of Botany 

 seem to us no less open to objection. The first impression 

 conveyed is that the subject can only have been admitted 

 at all under protest, and that it is looked upon as of de- 

 cidedly subordinate importance to all the rest. While 

 Mineralogy and Crystallography have three pages devoted 



to them, Geology five, and Zoology four. Botany is com- 

 pressed into one, and the information and assistance 

 given is of the most meagre. The books " provisionally 

 recommended " are ten in number ; but what is meant by 

 a provisional recommendation we do not know. The 

 Board must surely have made up its mind as to whether 

 the works are to be recommended or not ; and we venture 

 to say that some even of these ten are books that ought 

 not to have obtained the sanction of such a body. Not 

 only does the list err on this side ; but books which are 

 familiar to every botanical teacher as the best elementary 

 works are not to be found in it. It must be remembered 

 that, as far at least as structural and systematic botany 

 are concerned, the student is now at the outset of his 

 career ; and yet what will be thought of a list of books 

 recommended to his notice which makes no mention of 

 either Oliver's " Lessons " or Lindley's " School Botany"? 

 In Geographical and Geological Botany, the recommen- 

 dations comprise the portions bearing on these subjects 

 of Henfrey's " Elementary Course" and Balfour's " i\Ianual 

 of Botany." Now, we think it is generally admitted that 

 thesc'are the least satisfactory portions of the works quoted ; 

 and we have no hesitation in saying that the student will 

 gain from them no adequate knowledge of the present 

 state of these sciences. Not a hint is given of the exis- 

 tence of original memoirs or essays, such as those of Da 

 Candolle, Grisebach, Heer, Unger, Hooker, and Carru- 

 thers. Again, in the other special subjects the excellent 

 practice is adopted of referring students to monographs 

 or treatises on special branches of the subject, which will 

 not be the least instructive part of his reading. In the 

 botanical list we find no reference even to works so 

 famiUar to every student as Mohl "On the Vegetable Cell," 

 Hofmeister "On the Higher Cryptogamia," or the writings 

 of Robert Brown. We venture to say that from the care- 

 ful study of any one of these works, or even of such 

 smaller treatises as Dr. Hooker's lecture on " Insular 

 Floras," or the introductory essay to his " Flora of Tas- 

 mania," the student will gain a deeper insight into the 

 philosophy of his science than from the greater number 

 of the books in the recommended list. 



But the greatest defect in the botanical section we take 

 to be the very small stress that appears to be laid on 

 practical work. In accordance with the prominence which 

 is given throughout the whole scheme to histology, it is 

 true that the candidate will be tried with " dissections 

 and descriptions of preparations, illustrating the minute 

 structure and organs of plants ;" but he is not informed 

 that his practical acquaintance with morphology and the 

 principles of classification will be tested by requiring him 

 — as is done at all the examinations at the University of 

 London, constituting the most fruitful source of " pluck " — ■ 

 to describe and refer to their natural orders plants pre- 

 sented to him in the room. We the more lament this 

 omission, because it will but have a tendency to confirm 

 the low estimate in which the science of Botany is held 

 even by many biologists, who look upon it as a mere 

 science of terms, leading to no large and comprehensive 

 principles, and susceptible of indefinite " cram." Until 

 Botany is rescued from this degrading position, and 

 teachers learn that it is as much a science of experiment 

 and observation as Animal Physiology or Cornparative 

 Anatomy, we shall always have to lament the dearth of 



