September 14, 1906.] 



SCIENCE. 



323 



the 'botanical Hinterland,' one may expect 

 the conventional frontier to become oblit- 

 erated. As Mr. F. F. Blackman has point- 

 ed out in a recent interesting contribution,^ 

 the chemist's point of view has undergone 

 a change with the growth of the science of 

 physical chemistry, and is now much more 

 in line with that of the biologist than was 

 formerly the case. This natural passage 

 from the problems of the one to those of 

 the other should be the means of attracting 

 into our body recruits possessing the neces- 

 sary chemical equipment to attack physi- 

 ological problems. 



As the position gains strength on the 

 physiological side, it will become possible 

 to render more effective service to agricul- 

 ture and other branches of economic 

 botany. 



This is of importance for a variety of 

 reasons. Among others it will bring public 

 support and recognition which will be all 

 for good, and it will provide an outlet for 

 our students. It will also afford unrivaled 

 opportunities for experiments on the large 

 scale. Even should economic conditions, 

 which compel us to import every vegetable 

 product, continue to prevail in this coun- 

 try, this will not be so in the colonies. As 

 time goes on, one may reasonably expect an 

 increasing demand for trained botanists, 

 ready to turn their hands to a great variety 

 of economic problems. 



From this rough sketch we see that the 

 prevailing school of botany has arisen very 

 independently of that which preceded it. 

 The discontinuity between them you might 

 almost call abrupt. All through the mid- 

 dle parts of the last century we were so 

 busy amassing and classifying plants that 

 the great questions of botanical policy were 

 left to solve themselves. Great herbaria 

 became of the order of things: they re- 



- ' Incipient Vitality,' New Phytologist, Vol. V., 

 p. 22. 



ceived government recognition, and they 

 continue their work apart. Those who 

 built up these great collections neglected to 

 convince the schools of the importance of 

 training a generation of botanists that 

 would use them. The schools were free, 

 and they have gone their own way, and 

 that way does not lie in the direction of 

 the systematic botany of the herbarium. 

 So long as this tendency prevails the her- 

 baria must languish. When I say languish, 

 I do not mean that they will suffer from 

 inefficient administration— their efficiency 

 probably has never been greater than at 

 the present time. But the effort involved 

 in their construction and upkeep is alto- 

 gether disproportionate to any service to 

 which they are put. Work, of course, 

 comes out of them ; it is no question of the 

 devotion or ability of individuals. It is 

 the general position, the isolation of sys- 

 tematic botany, to which attention should 

 be directed with a view to its alleviation. 

 If things are left to take their course 

 there is the fear of atrophy through disuse. 

 The operation of the ordinary economic 

 laws will no doubt serve to fill vacancies 

 on the staff as they arise, but the best men 

 will be reluctant to enter. Of course the 

 pendulum may begin to swing the other 

 way, though no indication of such a change 

 is yet apparent. 



Let us now attempt an analysis of some 

 of the causes which have led to this con- 

 dition of affairs. 



In the first place, our two national her- 

 baria (Kew and the British Museum) 

 stand apart from the ordinary botanical 

 current. They are administered, the one 

 as a portion of the Kew establishment 

 under the board of agriculture, the other 

 as a department of the British Museum 

 under a board of trustees. Neither has 

 any connection, direct or indirect, with any 

 university organization. The keepers and 



