April 21, 1893.] 



SCIENCE. 



hensive training, or at least from the lack of profiting by it. If 

 while himself a student at the John Hopkins University, he had 

 determined to get all there was in the admirable elementary 

 courses which are there offered in general biography, zoology, 

 animal physiology and embryology, instead of interesting himself 

 from the first mainly in plants, he would not only have been en- 

 abled to take a broader view of his specialty, but would not have 

 committed himself to the position in which this article places 

 him. 



Mr. MacMillan incidentally remarks that he has "not at present 

 time to discuss the fundamental absurdity of courses in ' general 

 biology,' as if it were possible to plunge boldly in to comparative 

 study of plants and animals before one has studied plants and 

 animals themselves. It is as if one should enter upon analytical 

 statics and follow it up by geometry and the calculus." Here 

 again Mr. MacMillan demonstrates the urgent need of a good 

 course in general biology for botanists as well as for zoologists. 

 Here the analogy drawn is false. Zoology and botany do not 

 bear a similar relation to biology that geometry and the calculus 

 bear to the higher mathematics. The instruments for solving 

 problems in botany and zoology are essentially the same, such as 

 good observation, sound reasoning, a knowledge of technical 

 methods, and of the other physical sciences. 



It is not necessary for the student to examine a large number 

 of organisms in order to come face to face with the fundamental 

 properties of living things, and this fact proves that Huxley and 

 his successors ai-e right in insisting that the study of biology is 

 one discipline. To teach the student this, and to lead him to 

 discover some of the wider agreements and differences of living 

 organisms, is of more intellectual value to him than to conduct 

 him at the start to the more special study of either plants or an- 

 imals. This is true whether he is to become a specialist in biolo- 

 gy or not. 



Some of the chief merits of Mr. MacMillan's paper have now 

 been pointed out. A. subordinate merit which it possesses is that 

 of calling attention to the defect in many institutions of not in- 

 cluding botany in their curriculum, or in not giving it the prom- 

 inence which it deserves. If he had limited himself to pointing 

 out this defect, without casting slurs upon honored institutions 

 and their graduates, in an offensive way, his article might have 

 done good. Feancts H. Heerick. 



Adelbert College, Cleveland, Oiio, April 15tli, 1893. 



A New Source of the So-Called Mexican Onyx. 



Lovers of the beautiful, in the way of high-grade material for 

 decoi'ative work, will be pleased to learn of the recent discovery, 

 on the peninsula of Lower California, of extensive depositsof the 

 so-called Mexican onyx. The new find is some 150 miles south- 

 east of San Diego, and 50 miles from the Pacific coast. The ma- 

 terial, as is the case with that of Mexico proper and other 

 sources, is a travertine (i.e., a spring deposit) andnot stalagmitic. 

 The deposits are essentially superficial, the material in many in- 

 stances so occuri'ing as to be taken directly from the surface of 

 the ground by means of bars and without previous stripping. 

 The colors are light green, rose, and white, variously veined and 

 tinted, and of great beauty, while in compactness of texture, 

 susceptibility to polish and freedom from flaws, the- material 

 leaves little to be desired. A company has already been organ- 

 ized for working the deposits, and the first shipment has reached 

 St. Louis, to be cat and p ilished for exhibition at Chicagoduring 

 the World's Columbian Exhibition. George P. Meeeill. 



Washiagton, D.C. 



BOOK-REVIEWS. 



Tlie Metaspernice of the Minnesota Valley, A list of the higher 

 seed-producing plants indigenous to the drainage basin of the 

 Minnesota River. By Conway MacMillan. Minneapolis, 

 1893. 839 pp. 2 Maps. 8". 



Botanists will examine this volume with interest, because of the 

 numerous new features it presents. It is the first of the botanical 



reports of the Geological and Natural History Survey of Minne- 

 sota, and, while entirely local in its character, it is very far be- 

 yond the usual local catalogue. It contains a record of 1,174 

 species and varieties, distributed among 407 genera and 106 fam- 

 ilies. Under each family reference is made to the place of its 

 original characterization, the number of genera and species, liv. 

 ing or extinct, it contains, and its distribution in a very general 

 way. Under each genus we have the synonomy as fully as may 

 be, again with a reference to the number of species and their 

 more detailed distribution. Finally, under each species and variety 

 the synonomy is given, still more detailed distribution, and men- 

 tion of herbaria where specimens ai'e to be found. It will thus be 

 seen that, while it is a catalogue of plants, it is one in a wider 

 sense than the majority of such publications. Its interest and 

 value to botanists lie not alone in the various facts above referred 

 to, but because it discards the time-honored arrangement of 

 orders, such as is found in the ordinary manuals and text-books, 

 and introduces the newer and more natural system of classifica- 

 tion. It contains, besides, a discussion of the factors upon which 

 classification is based principles of geographical distribution, and 

 extraordinary statistical detail respecting the plants named in 

 the list. 



We turn first to the classification and nomenclature. We well 

 recollect when we first began to study botany, the feeling of sat- 

 isfaction that was felt at the seeming stability of the science. 

 We had been familiar with the discussions of zoologists and geol- 

 ogists regarding the condition of nomenclatuie in their respective 

 branches, and the botanical manuals gave no sign of changes that 

 were to come, or indicated the presence of dangerous ground; 

 But rumblings of the coming eruption were soon heard, although 

 it was not until the publication of that amazing book of Kuntze's, 

 " Revisio genera plautarum," which has turned everything upside 

 down and set the whole botanical world by the ears, that the full 

 violence of the eruption was realized. Against many of the sug- 

 gestions of this reformer there has been open revolt, but upon 

 the whole the effect has been good. It is true it has compelled 

 those who learned their botany some years ago to learn much of 

 it over again, and has made our latest text-books obsolete or old- 

 fashioned, but it has also put the science upon a more stable 

 foundation. 



The discussion of geneiic and specific names has introduced the 

 perennially fertile subject, a natural classification of orders. The 

 plan of placing Ranunculacese at the head of Anthophyta and 

 Graminese at the foot is so familiar that scarcely any other seems 

 possible. It has been recognized, however, that the system 

 was very faulty, and numerous endeavors have been made to 

 change it. As long ago as 1883 the present writer, in an article 

 entitled " On the Position of the Compositae and Orchidese in the 

 Natural System,"' pointed out that the old arrangement was far 

 from being the best; and he made some suggestions as to what 

 families should take the highest rank. He suggested that among 

 dicotyledons Compositse should be regarded as the highest, inas- 

 much as here is found the largest production of seed (the end of all 

 plant life) with the least expenditure of material, and, at the same 

 time, with ample provision for cross fertilization. The immense 

 number of species and their great range were also cited to jjrove 

 their high position. The impossibility of arranging the orders in a 

 strictly natural and yet lineal system was recognized, but it was 

 suggested that the Labiaias were somewhat parallel with the Com- 

 positae in their differentiation; while with that order were asso- 

 ciated, as near allies, Verbenacese, Boraginese, and Scrophularinse. 

 Among polypetalous orders Leguminosse was placed highest, fol- 

 lowed closely by Rosacese, Saxifragaceee, Umbelliferse, and Ranun- 

 culacese. Among monocotyledons the Orchidese were accorded 

 the highest rank, mainly because of their large numbers, wide dis- 

 tribution, varied form, and elaborate means for cross fertilization. 

 At the same time, a general scheme was proposed, which is repro- 

 duced here. In it, it will be observed that there are four general 

 lines of descent, viz., from Orchideae, Liliace», Palmaj, and 

 Gramineee. The relative rank of the smaller orders is not that 

 which has been followed in the volume under review, but the 



1 American Naturalist, December, 1883. Also read In the Minneapolis 

 meeting of the A. A. A. S. 



