CORRESPONDING SOCIETIES. 339 
commendable enthusiasm, but it is sometimes a blind one. Areas must be 
drained; reservoirs must be made; railways must be constructed. When all 
is said and done, economic matters have, and always will have, greater weight 
than natural history matters. We must give way and mourn the loss of our 
valued friends. 
I emphasise this side of the question because I know abler men than I will 
deal with preventable cases. But it seems to me that even here we need not 
be idle. Probably in the case of economic advances, the best means of preserv- 
ing species liable to destruction would be some such method as the following : 
Our natural history societies should be provided with a complete list of the fauna 
and flora of their districts; they should make themselves acquainted with all 
schemes which involve the destruction of any species, and attempt to preserve 
them by such means as transplanting as nearly in the same district as possible. 
In such discussions as these, it frequently happens that much time is spent 
in denouncing the actions of certain people in ruthless collecting; I am fully 
aware of such disgraceful vandalism, but at the same time I feel that we should 
be careful to see that we do not anger any class by hasty accusations. One 
person who is always accused is the teacher of nature-study with his class of 
pupils. To some teachers a plant has no interest unless it be rare in the 
locality ; so one of the first things to try and bring home to all such teachers 
is that the commonest plants are of equal educational value to rare ones. 
I have had some considerable experience of teachers of nature-study, and in 
spite of the accusations that have been made, I must put in a defence for them. 
Teachers are either well-informed naturalists or only superficially acquainted 
with animals and plants. In the former case, I-have found that, being well 
acquainted with the rarer forms, they have been the very first to take special 
pains to preserve them from destruction; in fact, they are the people I look 
to for assistance in any reforms we may suggest. In the latter case, I know, 
we have unfortunate offenders, but there are many reasons why the damage 
done is not so great as many would have us believe. For example, such teachers 
seldom pass beyond the most frequented lanes, and very little precious stuff 
grows in such places; again, their very limited knowledge restricts them to the 
commonest plants; no wideawake teacher will invite difficulties by attracting 
the attention of his scholars to a plant he knows nothing about. Examine the 
collections of children, and you almost invariably find that they consist of 
common plants. Classes of children have been seen in Sutton Park, each 
child of which had a whole specimen of the butterwort, with the result that 
the area visited was quite cleared of this plant. This is an unfortunate 
instance only too true, but I venture to suggest it is not a common practice. 
It so happens that insectivorous plants have a great attraction for those who 
draw up school-curricula; we do not wish to prohibit instruction on these plants, 
but to do something to prevent their removal. 
Another unwelcome character is the professional collector; where money is 
a consideration, the instinct to preserve rareties is liable to be suppressed. 
But where does the fault lie? Surely with the purchaser. Much as we might 
dislike acknowledging it, it is the places of higher learning that are primarily 
responsible. As university-teachers we require and buy these precious species, 
and so the professional collector makes his money and exterminates them. 
Yet I know collectors who are most careful not to remove such species entirely ; 
probably also from the business point of view, for it is advisable to keep a 
supply! What is the remedy? Why should not the natural history societies 
take the matter up? If, as I have suggested, each natural history society 
provided itself with a list of the fauna and flora of its district, and undertook 
to supply material, the work might be transferred from the ruthless money- 
maker to interested societies; at any rate a sufficient check would be placed on 
supplies to prevent total extinction. 
Of course the difficulties are great, and we must decide whether or not they 
are insurmountable. Naturalists are often bad business men, and from my 
experience I would say a professor would perhaps be surer of his stock from 
the professional collector. Another thing, the professional collector is usually 
a member of the local natural history society, and a valuable member too. So 
the difficulties increase. 
z2 
