July 8, 1910] 



SCIENCE 



55 



Millard, H. A. Schuette, chemistry; W. P. 

 Gee, J. E. Wodsedalek, zoology; H. M. Helm, 

 anatomy. 



The following appointments in scientific 

 departments have been made at Northwestern 

 University: Dr. George T. Hargitt, son of 

 Professor Chas. W. Hargitt, instructor in 

 zoology; William Logan Woodburn, instructor 

 in botany; Dr. Charles D. Brooks, son of the 

 late Professor William K.' Brooks, instructor 

 in mathematics. 



The University of Leeds has received £11,- 

 000 from various sources for the endowment 

 of a professorship of applied chemistry re- 

 lating to the coal industries, as a memorial 

 to the late Sir George Livesey. 



De. Prank Becht, of the University of 

 Chicago, has been appointed assistant pro- 

 fessor and head of the department of physi- 

 ology at the University of Illinois. 



At the University of Pennsylvania, Dr. G. 

 H. Hallett has been promoted from an as- 

 sistant professorship of mathematics to the 

 rank of professor. Dr. M. J. Babb, Dr. G. G. 

 Chambers and Dr. O. E. Glenn have been 

 promoted from instructors to be assistant pro- 

 fessors of mathematics. 



Dr. LeRoy McMastek has been advanced to 

 the rank of assistant professor of chemistry 

 at Washington University. 



Mr. J. K. Jameson' has been appointed to 

 the chair of anatomy at Leeds, vacant by the 

 resignation of Professor GriiEth, who has ac- 

 cepted the professorship of medicine. 



DISCUSSION AND CORRESPONDENCE 

 4 BOTANICAL GARDENS 



To THE Editor of Science: While I am 

 ready to subscribe to the ideas expressed in 

 the Symposium on Botanical Gardens given 

 before Section G of the American Association 

 for the Advancement of Science, at the Boston 

 meeting held December, 1909, and published 

 in the April 29 issue of Science, I regret that 

 the most important work was not sufiiciently 

 dwelt upon. The ecological, biological, mor- 

 phological, physiological, esthetic and educa- 

 tional features of botanical gardens were 



clearly set forth. This is, indeed, all well and 

 good, but it leaves yet much to be done. 



A botanical garden should be essentially 

 experimental, dominated by an economical, 

 practical method. All of the other features 

 above indicated should be made subsidiary. 

 In other words the botanical garden should 

 have an economically commercial significance. 

 Its chief function should be to develop the 

 economic botanical resources of the country. 

 To this end the garden should be divided into 

 two distinct parts. In one should be carried 

 on the purely experimental work — that is, ex- 

 perimental work having a practical signifi- 

 cance. In the second part should be carried 

 on test plantings on a practically economic 

 commercial basis. Such gardens need not be 

 large nor expensive, and they should be dis- 

 tributed geographically and climatologically, 

 in order that the greatest good might be ac- 

 complished with a minimum of expenditure. 

 The idea is in the main carried out by Kew 

 with its substations and by the experimental 

 stations of the U. S. Department of Agricul- 

 ture, excepting that the monetary outlay in- 

 volved is too great and the mistake is made 

 of controlling substations from one central 

 point. For example, nothing can be more 

 absurd than a management in London direct- 

 ing affairs in India or in South America, or 

 the authorities at Washington directing or 

 controlling the experimental work in Cali- 

 fornia, Florida or Texas. In fact, as far as 

 the United States are concerned, each state 

 should support, direct and control its own 

 experimental work absolutely, with, of course, 

 a cooperative relationship with the experi- 

 mental gardens or stations of other states. 

 A very efficient state garden of this kind does 

 not require more than ten acres of ground, a 

 propagating house, a tool shed, an office with 

 store rooms, a competent director, one tech- 

 nical assistant, two or three skilled gardeners 

 and the necessary additional equipment. The 

 annual cost of maintaining such a garden in 

 high operative efficiency need not exceed $10,- 

 000. The financial gain to the state to be 

 derived from such a garden would soon 

 amount to millions of dollars annually. To 



