100 HISTORY OF PHYTOPATHOLOGY 



diseases. Thus is indicated, both by order and size, 

 his predispositionist attitude. A third edition, com- 

 pletely revised, appeared in 1908-13.1 Sorauer is also 

 well known as the founder and editor of the German 

 phytopathologic journal, Zeitschrift fiir Pflanzenkrank- 

 heiten. He continued to write on phytopathologic sub- 

 jects until his death, and was always much interested 

 in international efforts to restrict the spread of plant 

 pathogenes. 



Harry Marshall Ward was undoubtedly the greatest 

 of English phytopathologists. His work and influence, 

 even more than that of Sorauer, has shaped our current 

 ideas and researches on predisposition. Trained in the 

 English University of Cambridge, he went abroad after 

 taking his bachelor's degree, studying under Sachs and 

 de Bary. From the latter he received his inclination 

 toward the study of fungi, and from the former his phys- 

 iologic point of view. His advent into the field of phy- 

 topathology came with his call in 1881, while still study- 

 ing in Germany, to investigate the coffee disease then 

 devastating the plantations of the island of Ceylon. 

 This commission was executed with energy and brilliancy. 

 His study of the pathogene, Hemeleia vastairix,^ made 



' The third edition appeared in three volumes. The first volume of 

 891 pages on non-parasitic diseases was written by Sorauer himself 

 (issued in parts from 1905-09); the second volume of 550 pages on 

 diseases caused by parasitic plants was prepared by G. Lindau (issued in 

 parts from 1905-08) ; the third volume of about the same size on insect 

 pests of plants was written by L. Reh (issued in parts from 1906-13). 



^Ward, H. M.: On the morphology of Hemeleia vastatrix Berk, 

 and Br. (the fungus of the coffee disease of Ceylon), Quart. Jour. Micro- 

 scop. Soc. n. s., 22 : 1-11, 1882; also, Researches on the life history of 

 Hemeleia vastatri.x, the fungus of the "coffee-leaf disease," Jour. Linn. 

 Soc, London, 19 : 299-335, 1882. 



