no 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XLVII. No. 1205 



ord and other journals have been a boon to 

 all of us, but are now proving inadequate. 

 The opportunity is ripe for the establish- 

 ment of a journal of botanical abstracts in 

 America; such an opportunity may never 

 again recur; it should not be allowed to 

 pass. 



3. A Popular Journal. — Our science 

 would greatly profit from the publication 

 of a journal, of the high character of, for ex- 

 ample, the National Geographic Magazine, 

 seeking to interpret to the general public 

 in an interesting and authoritative man- 

 ner the methods and results of botanical 

 science. There is ample material for such 

 a publication, and it would be heartily wel- 

 comed by the great body of high-school 

 teachers of botany, as well as by many ama- 

 teurs and nature lovers. 



4. Botanic Gardens. — The speaker will 

 certainly be excused from urging the value 

 and need of botanic gardens. "Ways in 

 which they not only further the cause of 

 botanical science, but may serve an entire 

 community, as well as its public-school sys- 

 tem, are so numerous, as has already been 

 demonstrated, that the members of the 

 Section and of the Botanical Society of 

 America might well become interested in 

 an organized effort to secure the establish- 

 ment of botanic gardens of reasonable size 

 and scope, but of scientific and educational 

 worth, in every American city of 10,000 or 

 more inhabitants. 



5. Need of More Popularizing. — The 

 Latin nomenclature in botany is about all 

 that is left to remind us of a period, not so 

 very far distant, when the fruits of scien- 

 tific research were kept inaccessible to all 

 but the learned few by being published in a 

 foreign, and even in a "dead" language. 

 At that period, owing to lack of educational 

 opportunities for the masses, the general 

 public could hardly have understood or ap- 



preciated the subject-matter of science even 

 if published in the vernacular. Happily 

 the situation is different now, for although 

 the scientists have difficulty in understand- 

 ing each other, the general public shows an 

 intelligent and eager appreciation of the 

 results of modern science, if only it is pre- 

 sented in non-technical language. The 

 difficulty is to get popular articles and 

 books from those most competent to pre- 

 pare them. Faraday and Lodge in phys- 

 ics, Tyndall and Duncan in chemistry, 

 Herschell and Ball in astronomy, Geikie 

 and Winchell in geology, Huxley and 

 Agassiz in zoology, Errera and Gray in 

 botany did not hesitate to give time to the 

 writing of popular articles and books ; and 

 I never heard any one suggest that their 

 research or their reputations as leaders in 

 scientific thought suffered in the least 

 thereby. For several years, however, there 

 has been a general disposition in botany to 

 follow the lead of an erstwhile famous 

 trust magnate, and let "the public be 

 damned," leaving popular interpretation 

 to reporters and professional popularizers. 

 As a natural result, popularizing and sub- 

 stantial scientific work came to be regarded 

 in certain quarters as mutually exclusive, 

 and the reputation of our science, outside 

 of its own charmed circle, suffered much. 

 A botanist holding a purely research posi- 

 tion, but having undoubted ability at popu- 

 larizing, recently expressed to me his hesi- 

 tancy at writing anything popular for fear 

 his reputation would suffer among his bo- 

 tanical contemporaries. 



But on what do I base my plea for more 

 popularizing? First, on the altruistic 

 basis that we owe it to the public. To con- 

 tribute toward raising the general level of 

 intelligence is a duty as well as a privilege, 

 especially in a democracy; to those having 



