130 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. LI. No. 1310 



the botanical and agricultural sections of that 

 great Association are of our number. Pomol- 

 ogists and men devoting themselves broadly to 

 horticultural science are with us. I should not 

 be surprised if there were present also men 

 w'ho call themselves bacteriologists, foresters, 

 or pharmacognosists, though the immediate 

 affiliation of their special national societies has 

 been shaped otherwise. We are here at the 

 present moment as botanists, viewing botany 

 from the various sides of its many specializa- 

 tions and applications. To-morrow we shall 

 be pressing its subdivisions and segregations 

 intensively in specialized sessions. Let us not 

 forget when we do this that in union lies 

 strength and that in division of labor lies effi- 

 ciency; nor that efficiency usually reaches its 

 maximum in the connected correlated organs 

 of an organism, each taking and giving for the 

 common good. 



I would not urge the tyro among us to be- 

 come less a cytologist, less a bryologist, less a 

 physiologist, less a bio-chemist, than his great- 

 est inspiration prompts : but I would urge him. 

 earnestly to be more a botanist, more a natur- 

 alist, more a disciple of a bro«d science which 

 in strength and efEectiveness and sy mm etry 

 comibines all that is good of its many and di- 

 versified component parts. 



Horticulturists talk of graftage. They know 

 that their art can produce more effective crea- 

 tures (than nature has evolved; but stock as 

 well as scion is selected for its inherent worth, 

 and both are essential to the whole that is 

 built up from them. 



The great world upheaval has severed many 

 a scientific union that seemed destined to last 

 interminably. Some of the disjointed parts 

 may never reunite: some unquestionably re- 

 quire careful handling. It appears to be our 

 plain and paramount duty now to see that, if 

 worth it, the parts of the old tree be given a 

 chance to establish themselves anew, either on 

 their own roots or on a better footing — not 

 thinking for a mo^ment that the tree of science 

 is limited in time or space or components, but 

 remembering always the old maxim that the 

 whole is equal to the sum of all its parts and 

 greater than any of its parts. 



Out of the world dismemberment has come 

 opportunity for cooperative world reorganiza- 

 tion and reconstruotion which can be made 

 more effective in science than anything that 

 has preceded it. The opportunity is ours. If 

 we make the most of it, we shall attain the 

 greatest of the achievements of science. Even 

 if we fail, we need not miss the lesson that ac- 

 complishment in our field is of necessity never 

 final but proves always to be the opening of 

 new fields, fresher and larger, to those who 

 understand the real nature of achievement — ■ 

 out of which opportunity continually develops. 



SOME SUGGESTIVE ADDRESSES, ETC. 



Allen, W. E. The naturalist's place in his com- 

 munity. Science, n. s. 50: 448-451, Nov. 34, 

 1919. 



Arthur, J. C. Research as a university function. 

 Science, n. s. 49: 387-391, Apr. 25, 1919. 



BaOey, L. H. The modern systematist. Science, 

 n. s. 46: 623-629, Dec. 28, 1917. 



Bailey, L. H. Some present needs in systematic 

 botany. Proc. Amer. Philosoph. Soc, 54: 58-65, 

 Apr., 1915. 



Bailey, L. H. What is horticulture? Proc. Soc. 

 Prom. Agric. Sd., 26: 31-40, 1905. 



Bessey, 0. E. Some of the next steps in botanical 

 science. Science, n. s. 37 : 1-13, Jan. 3, 1913. 



Botanical teaching. A conference at the Minneap- 

 olis meeting. Science, n. s. 33: 633-649, Apr. 

 28, 1911. 



Campbell, D. H. The present and future of bot- 

 any in America. Science, n. s. 41: 185-191, 

 Feb. 5, 1915. 



Clinton, G. P. Botany in relation to agriculture. 

 Science, n. s. 43 : 1-13, Jan. 7, 1916. 



Copeland, E. B. Botany in the agricultural college. 

 Science, n. s. 40 : 401-405, Sept. 18, 1914. 



Coulter, J. M. Botany as a national asset. Sci- 

 ence, n. s. 45: 225-231, Mar. 9, 1917. 



Coulter, J. M. The evolution of botanical re- 

 search. Science, n. s. 51 : 1-8, Jan. 2, 1920. 



Crozier, W. L. The position and prospects of bot- 

 any. Science, n. s. 48 : 193-194, Aug. 23, 1918. 



Davis, B. M. Botany after the war. Science, 

 n. s. 48: 514-515, Nov. 22, 1918. 



Farlow, W. G. The change from the old to the 

 new botany in the United States. Science, n. s. 

 37: 79-86, Jan. 17, 1915. 



Gager, C. S. A basis for reconstructing botanical 



