EDUCATION OF A MAN OF SCIENCE 83 



for music or microscopy, but on something wider — 

 on the novelty of being taught to do something 

 physical, something with one's hands and ears 

 and eyes. I am sure boys ought to have more 

 practical teaching — ^not necessarily in science, but 

 such things as mild carpentering, the tying of knots, 

 and such exercise in rough weighing and measuring 

 as would form a basis for a little elementary 

 physics. The same is true of girls, and in one way 

 they need handiwork more than boys. I found, in 

 my Cambridge class of practical plant-physiology, 

 that the girls had not such 'deft fingers' as their 

 brothers ; I believe the difference is largely due 

 to the boys having played with string and knives, 

 etc., for many idle hours. Both boys and girls 

 must be taught to use, not only their hands, but 

 their eyes. It seems to me piteous that when I was 

 at school there was absolutely nothing done to 

 keep alive the natural sharp-eyedness of children. 

 I remember vividly the intense pleasure which my 

 father gave me (a very small boy) by showing sur- 

 prise at my knowledge of common trees and shrubs 

 in a winter coppice. I am sure that school did 

 much to kill the power of observation in me. 



It may be that observation is an essentially 

 transitory quality, a fleeting ancestral reminiscence, 

 a trail of glory, like other savage traits in children. 

 But more than now survives might be preserved to 

 us by training at school. It ought not to be 

 possible for a boy to come up to a University so 

 blind and helpless as to describe a wall-flower 

 (which has six obvious stamens arranged in a 

 striking pattern) as having "about five stamens." 



