Apeil 1, 1898.] 



SCIENCE. 



465 



nation of headlines, etc., is consistent through- 

 out. The illustrations have been largely re- 

 drawn, and the frequent use of color in them 

 render them more intelligible. Why is it that 

 American publishers insist in using a thick and 

 heavy paper in their publications? Certainly 

 thin paper like this (the 460 pages are but 

 three-quarters of an inch in thickness) has 

 numerous advantages. A final word, which may 

 interest some, is that the German is clear and 

 simple and does not require extensive linguistic 

 attainments and capacity for unravelling in- 

 volved sentences for its perfect comprehension. 

 The section on the circulatory system is prom- 

 ised for this year. We await its appearance 

 with the highest anticipations. 



J. S. KiNGSLEY. 



A Laboratory Manual in Practical Botany. By 

 Charles H. Clark, A.M., D. Sc, Principal 

 of Windsor High School. New York, Amer- 

 ican Book Company. 1898. Small 8vo. Pp. 

 271. 



It is significant of the change which has come 

 over the teaching of elementary botany in this 

 country that the publishing house which has 

 for many years issued the text-books which 

 perpetuated the old method of presenting the 

 subject has at length found it desirable to bring 

 out a book written along modern lines. The 

 author has been known for some time as the 

 writer of a handy book of practical methods in 

 microscopy, but has not been known as a 

 ■worker in botany. He has adopted that labo- 

 ratory method which has commended itself to 

 many teachers — namely, of first presenting a 

 summary statement including the principal 

 features of the plant in hand, and following it 

 by a series of ' practical studies' in which the 

 pupil is not told too much, but is led to make 

 independent observations. 



After a rather long and quite needless pre- 

 liminary chapter there follow chapters on 

 ' Slime Molds' (Myxomycetes), Diatoms, Fis- 

 sion Plants, Algae, Fungi, Bryophytes, Pteri- 

 •dophytes and ' Spermaphytes.' The general 

 sequence is therefore quite good, since it is in 

 accord with that usually adopted in modern 

 works. In a general way, we may say that the 

 presentation is good, also, the plants selected 



as examples being those commonly regarded as 

 fairly representing the larger groups. It is un- 

 fortunate, therefore, that in the compilation of 

 this book the author could not have had the aid 

 of a botanist well acquainted with the various 

 groups of plants treated. The failure to do 

 this has led to many errors of statement, 

 doubtless due to a misunderstanding of the sub- 

 ject in the labor of compiling from various texts. 



In order that this book may be a safe guide, 

 there are numerous errors and slips which will 

 need correction. When we add to the direct 

 errors a looseness of statement which too often 

 mars the pages we have ample reason for ask- 

 ing for a revision before too much harm has 

 been done. Thus it is inexcusable to call the 

 ear of corn with its husks a fruit (p. 30), and to 

 say that Spirogyra is one-celled, the cells being 

 held together by a gelatinous coating (p. 41). 

 We all once said that the Siphonese were one- 

 celled, as the author still does (p. 72), but we 

 know better now, and the same may be said re- 

 garding the fusion of the ' sporidia' of Ustilagi- 

 neae (p. 122), not now regarded as a sexual act. 

 So, too, it is an error to say that stomata first 

 appear in Pteridophytes (p. 184), good ones 

 occurring on the moss sporophytes, and that 

 the macrospores of Spermatophytes are borne 

 in embryo-sacs (p. 205). The directions for the 

 sectioning of the youngest pine cone (p. 209) 

 are radically wrong, since at this time there is 

 neither ' embryo-sac ' nor ' endosperm ' present, 

 while fertilization does not occur until a year 

 later. 



A few examples of loose and inexact state- 

 ment will suffice to show how seriously the 

 book offends in this direction. Thus, on pp. 9, 

 10, ' ' Another fact which distinguishes the Thal- 

 lophytes is that the female gamete is never an 

 archegonium, while in all other groups it is 

 essentially an archegonium;" p. 12, "The 

 terms group, branch, class, order and family are 

 variously and arbitrarily used by writers ; ' ' 

 also (p. 40), " different varieties may be found," 

 where the author means ' difierent species ; ' 

 still, again (p. 79), ' is the best known plant of 

 its class,' here evidently intended to refer to 

 its order or family. There is no excuse for a 

 description of a fern prothallium as ' a small 

 thalloid leaf (p. 185), nor for the description 



