46 Recent Literature. 
RECENT LITERATURE. 
Gray’s “ ELEMENTS oF Botany.” !—This is a thorough revis- 
ion of the deservedly well-known Lessons in which, for almost 
a generation, American botanists have made their first acquaintance 
with elementary botany. In the revision the venerable author 
reverted to the title of his first book, which appeared fifty-one years 
ago! Naturally, this coincidence of names suggests a comparison of 
the two books. 
The first Elements was a duodecimo of four hundred and twenty- 
six pages, and was brought out by the house of G. & C. Carvill & 
Co., of New York, in 1836, the preface bearing date of April of 
that year. There is a good deal of similarity between this pioneer 
and the book which now, after the lapse of half a century, bears its 
name; and still there are very many differences. 
In the early book the word protoplasm did not occur, for the very 
good reason that Mohl had not yet coined it; nor is there any 
direct reference to the thing, while in the present work protoplasm, 
cells, cell-contents and cell-walls, receive sufficient attention to 
give the beginner a general knowledge of what they are. 
Vegetable physiology was very crudely treated in the earlier 
book, the extensibility, elasticity, hygroscopicity, endosmosis and 
excitability of plant tissues being gravely discussed in a way in 
striking contrast with the admirable summary given in Section 
XVI. of the later work. 
In the first Elements “spongioles”’ were still supposed to be the 
organs of absorption in roots, and there was supposed to be a 
distinct ascending and descending sap in the stem. The turpen- 
tine of the Conifers and the latex of various plants were considered 
to be special kinds of descending sap. The movements of plants 
were discussed as among the curious things, but the meaning or pur- 
pose of the movements was not suspected. In describing Dionea 
muscipula, it Was said of the unfortunate insect that its “ only chance 
of escape consists of remaining perfectly quiet until the leaf un- 
closes”! Pollination was, of course, treated in the old way: the 
Barbary stamens were said to “ seldom fail to project a quantity of 
pollen upon thestigma,” and it was stated that “ the relative position 
of the anthers and stigmas is generally such as to favor mechanically 
the application of the pollen to the latter.” 
Turning to the new book, one sees what a great advance has 
been made in this field—which we may call Darwinian botany— 
in which such terms as close fertilization, cross-fertilization, cleis- 
1 The Elements of Botany, for Beginners and for Scholars. By AS% 
bg Ivison, Blakeman & Co., New York and Chicago. 1887. 8Vv0,_ 
m 
