186 
he died in poverty and almost friendless. Most of his numerous 
publications might better never have been written, yet with the 
dross are occasionally to be found grains of pure gold, and the 
present generation is inclined to put a more just estimate upon 
the work of Rafinesque than has hitherto prevailed. 
Amos Eaton was the first great popularizer of botany in this 
country, and in tracing back the history of any American 
botanist of the past century we are as likely as not to find that 
aton was, botanically speaking, his father or grandfather. 
Eaton was a teacher, and was always full of enthusiasm of such 
a contagious character that his pupils found it irresistible. 
Wherever he went he inspired others with the same interest in 
natural science ner e felt himself. None of his predecessors 
could be compared a him in re respect except perhaps B. S. 
Barton, and Barton’s personality was cold and formal when com- 
pared with that of Eaton. His manual, prepared specifically to 
meet the needs of the amateur, was popular for many years, and 
went through eight editions. The last eighteen years of his life 
were chiefly occupied with labors incident to the establishment 
a administration of the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, at 
nong the many inspired by him was Mrs. Almira 
hen ae Mrs. Phelps, whose text-book did so canich 
to popularize the study of botany. 
At this time there was no group of botanists in New England 
comparable to those in Philadelphia and New York ; yet at least 
two New England botanists of this period should be mentioned. 
One was Dr. Jacob Bigelow, author of a Boston flora which ap- 
peared in three editions. He was one of the most famous of 
Boston physicians, and lived to be nearly 92 years of age. The 
other was Professor Chester Dewey, well known for his work on 
the difficult genus Carex 
Another man who was doing remarkable work at about the 
same time was Stephen Elliott, of Charleston, South Carolina. 
Isolated from most other botanists, with meagre facilities for the 
prosecution of scientific work, occupied much of the time with 
his duties as a member of the legislature of his state, he never- 
theless published, at intervals, beginning in 1816, a descriptive 
