272 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XLIX, No. 1264 



of his time working with plants why not call 

 him a botanist, instead of — to take at random 

 one of the most recent titles which has come 

 to my notice — " assistant in horticultural 

 chemistry and bacteriology ? " 



One difficulty in the past has been that the 

 commercial man and the botanist have been 

 too far apart. The war has helped to correct 

 this situation, but much remains to be 

 achieved. A few years ago there was pub- 

 lished in the Missouri Botanical Garden Bul- 

 letin a short popular article by Dr. von 

 Schrenk on " The lightest known wood — ^half 

 the weight of cork." Because anything that 

 is the lightest or biggest or most expensive in 

 the world will gain the attention of the press, 

 the article was widely reprinted. Conse- 

 quently the Garden was besieged, by manu- 

 facturers in this country and abroad for in- 

 formation as to where the wood could be ob- 

 tained. One might have supposed that the 

 business man had exhausted every effort in an 

 attempt to obtain such a product. As a direct 

 result of the article there now exists in New 

 York City the American Balsa Wood Corpor- 

 ation which does a large business in supplying 

 this wood to those who need it. The botanist 

 had had the information for years, but there 

 was no adequate means of bringing it to the 

 attention of those most concerned. Of course, 

 had the account appeared under the title of 

 " Ochroma Lagopus " the probability is that 

 the industry in this wood would still be un- 

 developed, for the fact remains that botanists 

 have been entirely too remiss in making 

 known to the technical man the practical 

 worth of his science. Much -more important 

 examples might be given, but I will refer to 

 but one other experience in order to illustrate 

 another phase of the matter. 



Soon after the war broke out, one of the 

 largest mail-order houses in the country sent 

 to the Garden three umbrella handles for the 

 pjirpose of having the wood identified. It be- 

 ing no longer possible to import these handles, 

 the concern wished to see whether the word 

 could be obtained in this country in order to 

 have them nlanufactured here. When I tell 

 you that one of the handles proved to be osage 



orange you will recognize that there was no 

 great difficulty on this score. The point I 

 wish to make is that had it been three chem- 

 icals or three ores to be examined and sources 

 from which they could be obtained indicated, 

 much would undoubtedly have been made — ■ 

 and rightly so — of the ability of the science 

 concerned to help the commercial man. But 

 because only a knowledge of botany was 

 needed no publicity or no credit for the work 

 was expected. Hundreds and possibly thou- 

 sands of determinations of plants by botanists 

 have been made since the outbreak of the war 

 for the purpose of giving the manufacturer 

 definite knowledge of the source and value of 

 fibers, drugs, condiments, gums and other use- 

 ful plant products. Some most fundamental 

 and far-reaching results have thus been real- 

 ized, but the standing of the botanist as a 

 benefactor of mankind has been little if any 

 changed. Perhaps if we returned to the old 

 term of "plant analyst" and charged at the 

 same rate a chemist would for making an 

 analysis of an unknown, it might help to re- 

 habilitate the botanist in the eyes of the 

 business man. At any rate some means of ob- 

 taining the recognition due to the science con- 

 cerned should be devised before all the work 

 and benefit accomplished is forgotten. Similar 

 instances from other lines of botany occur to 

 all of you. Are we to continue along the 

 same old path for the want of a definite plan 

 calculated to improve the situation ? I hope 

 not. 



But before I refer to this aspect of the sub- 

 ject, I wish to hasten to point out that all I 

 have said must not be regarded as implying 

 that the only aim of botanical science is to 

 be of direct practical application. On the 

 contrary, I would regard it as the greatest 

 catastrophe which could befall botany and 

 calculated to place it in a much worse position 

 than it is — to neglect what is sometimes 

 called pure botany or research. Still further, 

 I am in hearty agreement with an opinion 

 recently expressed in Science that it is a grave 

 mistake to attempt to justify research by 

 claiming that it may possibly lead to some 

 practical result. " Research for research's 



