1890.] Botany. 673 
BOTANY. 
Some Elementary Botanies.—That there is a dissatisfaction 
with the commoner methods of teaching botany as set forth in the text 
books, is indicated by the numerous attempts of various teachers to 
give us better books. In no other science is there to-day such diver- 
sity of opinion as to the best method of introducing the pupil to the 
subject to be studied. As a result we havea multiplication of elemen- 
tary books, each designed to lead the pupil into his work bya different 
route. For twenty years the little books by Miss Youmans have stood as 
a sort of protest against mere ** book botany.” ‘Though faulty in many 
particulars, they were valuable in showing that there are other ways of 
teaching botany than the stereotyped ones. A recent book, *'* De- 
scriptive Botany,” by the same author, has much in it to commend. 
At the very beginning the pupil is told to supply himself with his own 
material for examination. He is told to ‘‘gather a variety of leaves; 
and to begin their study by comparing them," etc., etc. Further on 
we find this: *« Pull up any herb which has a distinct stem, and com- 
pare the stem with the root,’’ and so on repeatedly. This is excellent, 
and the pupil cannot fail to be greatly benefited by such a course. 
There is too marked an emphasis given to technical terms, which are 
needlessly printed in italics, and too frequently there is a dictionary- 
like brevity, as when we read that ‘‘ The leaf of a fern is called a 
frond,” and ** The stalk or petiole of a frond is called a sz;e." Why 
this is so is not hinted. The ‘‘ Popular Flora ”’ is just what it pretends 
to be—popular—and will be useful to the beginner who has prepared 
himself aright to take it up. It contains brief but plain descriptions 
of the more common flowering plants including cultivated as well as 
wild species. It is pleasant to note that the Gymnosperms are as- 
signed to their proper place between Angiosperms and the Pterido- 
phytes. It is not so pleasant, however, to note that the explanation of 
the structure of the flowers of the Conifers (the sole representatives of 
the Gymnosperms) is wholly erroneous. — There has been an attempt to 
carry the old and discarded ideas as to floral structure over into the 
new classification. The Conifers as described in this book should go 
back into their old position, sandwiched between the Monocotyledons 
and Dicotyledons ! 
In many points the ** High School Botany," prepared by H. B. 
Spotton for the use of Canadian students, has a considerable resem- 
