276 
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY 
[Vol. 8 
be held within the college, and on that day an oration should be delivered 
exhorting the fellows and members to search and study out the secrets of 
nature by way of experiment, and also, for the honor of the profession, to 
continue in mutual love and affection among themselves. Clearly there is 
illustrious and time-honored precedent for the Botanical Society of America 
to issue its invitations to "come and eat four grains of rice," as the hospitable 
dweller in Venice would phrase his most cordial request for your presence 
at dinner. 
I have chosen for my remarks this evening a title so inclusive that, to 
relieve apprehension regarding any intention to be encyclopedic, I feel it 
incumbent to state at the outset that it is only a camouflaged sophomoric 
trick to secure the opportunity for more or less disconnected comments, 
although on that account, I trust, not less timely or weighty. I propose to 
speak from the point of view of the investigator and advanced student, 
rather than from the more usual pedagogic one of the schoolmaster or pupil. 
But first of all permit me to revert to Harvey's suggestion that for "the 
honor of the profession " the members cultivate "mutual love and affection." 
In the earlier days of botanical organization in America, the kind of organi- 
zation that first attempted to embrace the length and breadth of the country, 
the inspiration for which came through the American Association for the 
Advancement of Science, there was a predominant homogeneity of sentiment 
and good will with mutual confidence. That was a period not so remote 
as to be beyond the memory of some of us. In the main that condition 
still exists. If in some particulars it has been violated, a remedy could be 
and should be applied. 
When making a tour of European universities and experiment stations 
some thirty or more years ago, I was particularly struck by the reluctance 
of many botanists in the German institutions to speak openly about their 
unpublished investigations. There seemed to be a feeling that, should they 
disclose any part of what they had accomplished, or had in mind to under- 
take, some colleague might rush into print and deprive them of their honors. 
It was not the precaution demanded in an older and more densely settled 
country against the irresponsible and lawless, causing the Germans to put 
two locks on each door, while in my western home we did not turn the key 
in the one lock that might happen to be there. It was rather a distrust of 
one's fellow workers, a state of mind we have learned to associate with a 
certain type of bureaucracy; and every German professor was at that time 
a government official. It seemed to me most absurd and uncalled for, 
quite unbecoming highminded, conscientious, and trustworthy men of 
science. Since then, some of the same spirit of exclusiveness and distrust, 
possibly with a tinge of selfishness, has occasionally become manifest in 
American botanical circles, and it is not surprising to find that it crops out 
most from government centers. It would be natural to suppose that those 
who are paid and supported in their scientific work from funds derived 
