April 11, 1919] 



SCIENCE 



343 



actively engaged iu pathological work, whose 

 records were available. These persons are of 

 various ages, are located iu all parts of the 

 United States, and the number is suflSciently 

 large to be representative of the entire body 

 of pathologists Of these 224 persons, 64, or 

 29 per c^t., graduated at state agricultural 

 colleges, 116, or 52 per cent, at universities 

 which include colleges of agriculture, and 44, 

 or 19 per cent., at colleges and universities 

 without direct agricultural connections. I did 

 not include in the above count those botanists 

 who have been drafted into pathological service 

 during the past few months on account of war 

 conditions. These workers are of varied origin, 

 are of all degrees of pathological training, and 

 doubtless will largely resume their former posi- 

 tions with the return of normal educational 

 conditions. Of the 44 pathologists listed as 

 graduating at non-agricultural colleges and 

 universities, over a third hail from a single 

 institution, and a number of the remainder 

 belong to the older group of pathologists who 

 were trained as botanists, and entered the 

 pathological field during the early period of 

 its development. It appears then, that during 

 the years preceding the war nou-agricultural 

 colleges and universities, excluding the single 

 institution mentioned above, furnished less 

 than 10 per cent, of the pathological workers 

 of the United States. Is this a fair proportion ? 

 Why are so few graduates of our old-time col- 

 leges and universities entering the rapidly 

 expanding field of plant pathology? 



An examination of the curricula of these 

 institutions is illuminating. Many of them 

 offer no botany at all, or only elementary 

 courses which are often labelled biology. Most 

 of the institutions which possess department.s 

 of botany offer only standard courses in certain 

 fundamental botanical topics and pay little if 

 any attention to practical phases of the sub- 

 ject. Pathology as such is nearly, if not quite 

 absent, and you can count on one hand with 

 fingers to spare the institutions which give 

 more than a passing consideration to mycol- 

 ogy. Physiologj', a subject of rapidly increas- 

 ing importance to all branches of applied bot- 

 any, fares only a little better than mycology. 



Botanical classes are usually small, graduate 

 students few, and general interest in botany 

 as a living subject undeveloped. The old bot- 

 any of the schools and colleges is too narrow 

 for the present day. Morphologj' and evolu- 

 tion are the backbone of most of these courses, 

 and of nearly all text-books. But evolution 

 needs no champion to-day, and botany taught 

 from that standpoint alone does not appeal to 

 American students. We need courses with a 

 new method of attack, and text-books written 

 from a new point of view. Botanical courses 

 must be made more human. They must be 

 squared with the progress and problems and 

 life of to-day, even if this means radical re- 

 vision of both methods and subject matter, 

 and the surrender of some of the accepted 

 standards which have served us indifferently 

 well in the past. Fortimately there are all 

 kinds of botanical subjects to interest all kinds 

 of people, and with judicious selection ele- 

 mentary courses may be made to appeal to the 

 many, rather than to the few. We must aban- 

 don the notion that the study of botany is a 

 summum bonum, a choice privilege to be ac- 

 corded only to the elect. The average student 

 and the ordinary citizen must know botany, 

 and must be aroused to an interest in plants as 

 one of the most important elements of their 

 environment. Only if this is done will the 

 botany of the future achieve the importance it 

 deserves. The responsibility for this vitaliza- 

 tion rests largely on the undergraduate col- 

 leges. They must see to it that botany lives 

 down its reputation of being an unimportant 

 study for students who hope to become red- 

 blooded men of affairs. They must not permit 

 botany to be separated from the great field of 

 agriculture which rightfully is hers. As well 

 might chemistry withdraw from the industries, 

 or mathematics deny mechanics and engineer- 

 ing. Botany has failed to qualify as an im- 

 portant subject during the emergency period 

 of the war. Let us ask ourselves, is botany 

 really unimportant to the nation at this time 

 of emergency, or have botanists permitted it 

 to appear so? 



If now we turn to the curricula of the col- 

 leges of agriculture we find extensive courses 



