418 
POPULAR SCIENCE REVIEW. 
character of the work is very good. Of course, the subjects are all treated 
in the most elementary style ; hut we doubt not that, so far as it is in- 
tended, as the author implies, for matriculation examination of the London 
University, it is amply sufficient for its purpose. According to the author, 
it is introductory to his previous work for the subsequent examinations of 
the London University, while it follows the same form and order, so that 
students, in pursuing subjects further, will be able easily to connect what 
they have to learn with what they have already learnt. At the same time, 
the author states that the book “ by no means represents the narrowest view 
which may be taken of the curriculum of the London University, but will, 
it is hoped, be found useful in schools generally, as containing a systematic 
explanation of the more elementary principles of this branch of natural 
philosophy.” We notice that each chapter is succeeded by a long series of 
questions, which takes the pupil through examples of all he has been 
studying. In most instances these questions are followed by the answers. 
In some they are not, thus leaving a certain amount within the range of the 
student’s knowledge. So far as we have seen, it is in all respects a clear 
and good manual. 
PLANT -FOOD.* 
i 
T HIS book, the author tells us frankly, lays no claim to originality. We 
are glad to hear it, for assuredly if it was not distinctly stated in the 
preface, we should have taken the author somewhat to task for his labours. 
But now the question comes, if there is no originality in the work, why was 
it published ? To this we have no answer in the author’s prefatorial 
remarks, and we are unable to guess anything in the shape of a reply our- 
selves. The book is essentially a made-up one ; and is, in addition, spread 
over about double the quantity of space that is requisite. We do not well 
know what to say about such works. They are really without any distinct 
value, and usually — and indeed the present is no exception — they put in a 
very unsatisfactory and abstractive sort of way, what is much better put, if 
a little more lengthily, in a more important treatise on the subject. For 
example, when we have in English such a splendid treatise as the u Natural 
Laws of Husbandry,” by Liebig, it is more than absurd to issue such a 
rudimentary incomplete work as that which Mr. Grundy has offered to the 
public. Of course it must be said that throughout his pages there is no 
symptom of grave error ; the book is accurate so far as we have seen. But 
the idea of publishing such a rudimentary kind of book in the language 
which contains Liebig’s splendid treatise, looks to our mind as a great weak- 
ness on the author’s part. Such books can do little or no good ; and, except 
that they gratify their author, we are ignorant of any service they can be 
capable of offering. 
* “ Notes on the Food of Plants.” By Cuthbert C. Grundy, F.C.S. 
London : Simpkin & Marshall, 1871. 
