924 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXXIX. No. lO^.y 



that it has become increasingly difficiilt for 

 every one, for any one, to state with any 

 degree of definiteness the correct name of 

 any considerable number of plants. That 

 we are in a muddle is evident. That we 

 shall never be able to clear it up I do not 

 believe. I shall not pretend, however, that 

 I am wise enough to tell you how this is 

 to be done. I very much doubt if any one 

 knows at pr&sent just what to do next, but 

 at least no harm can come from a free dis- 

 cussion. If we but knew just what has 

 gotten us into our present plight it would 

 simplify matters, but even then the appli- 

 cation of the remedy would be diiScult. 

 We have each so long been a law unto our- 

 selves that it will be impossible to secure 

 any considerable unity of action at once. 

 Particularly will this be true if there is 

 no agreement that a remedy is needed. 

 Some will feel so, in spite of the fact that 

 a large majority of the botanists of this 

 country would subscribe to the following 

 arraignment: Our work has been analytic, 

 not constructive. We have dismembered 

 organisms and held up to view their com- 

 ponent parts. We have been looking for 

 differences and with such amazing success 

 that the fundamental resemblances have 

 largely escaped our notice. We have thus 

 produced a pot-pourri that is the despair 

 of every one except ourselves, and most of 

 us do not know how to unravel our own 

 mysteries. 



I know this is a terrible charge to lay at 

 our own doors, but perhaps it comes with 

 better grace from one whom others have 

 chosen to consider as particeps criminis. 

 I dare not flatter myself that I have been 

 even one of the chief offenders, but I ac- 

 knowledge with humiliation that I have 

 had a small share in producing the disaster 

 that has overtaken us. I now stand before 

 you thoroughly repentant. Would that I, 

 like the reformed inebriate or the reclaimed 



sinner, could preach a gospel of reform 

 with such fiery zeal that I should reach my 

 erring brothers. 



I know that only the dead make no mis- 

 takes. We have been passing through a 

 period of great botanical activity and he 

 who has not made many mistakes is not 

 much of a botanist. It is better to have 

 been alive for a decade and have to face 

 our errors than to have been lying immobile 

 blankly gazing at the stars for a millen- 

 nium. However, there is no virtue in mis- 

 takes as such. Our endeavor should be the 

 maximum of activity and progress with a 

 minimum of error and lost motion. 



That the names of plants have become so 

 unnecessarily burdened with synonyms 

 may be partly accounted for by the follow- 

 ing considerations. 



1. We have been so busy looking for 

 differences that we have forgotten that 

 classification is fundamentally based upon 

 resemblances. A distinguished systematist 

 has said that there are two kinds of botan- 

 ists — "those who see differences and those 

 who do not." I fear that some of the 

 former class have had their discriminating 

 faculties over-stimulated, since species have 

 been founded upon and keyed out upon 

 such valueless charactei's as one fourth mm. 

 in the length of the stigma and scores of 

 others even less evident. 



2. We have thrown down the old concept 

 of a species and we find ourselves in a 

 jungle of illy defined forms out of which 

 we shall never be able to come until we are 

 willing to chop out the water sprouts that 

 grow among and often from the loftier 

 trees. Time tests many species. It is not 

 conclusive, but it is very presumptive evi- 

 dence against their validity if, as years 

 pass and further collections are made, no 

 other specimens are referred to them. In 

 examining the material in any large her- 

 barium one finds many such hermit sheets. 



