407 
REVIEWS. 
HENFEEY’S BOTANY* 
I T is a strange fact, "but not the less is it a true one, that while all other 
branches of science have made immense advances in this and in other 
countries, Botany has, in England at least, remained pretty nearly as it was 
ten years ago. Of course we mean to refer to structural and scientific 
botany, and not to the mere collection and increasing of plants which some- 
times we think improperly receives its name ; for it indeed is one thing to- 
gather and dry and name a quantity of plants and fruit, and another to discover 
the general laws by which they obtain their nourishment from the soil, or 
bring forth the seed in due time, or are distributed over different parts of 
the globe. We do not for a moment wish it to be inferred that we desire 
to direct attention to these phenomena above all others. What we do mean 
and what we will say is this, that it is especially to them that the attention 
of students should be directed, if any good is to come from regular botanical 
study. And believing this, it has always been a matter of regret to us that 
Professor Henfrey was removed from amongst us; for we doubt not that, 
had he remained, much would now have been done which has been left un- 
done in the department to which we have alluded. 
But while we hold this opinion, which it would be unfair not to admit, 
we must not place ourselves in such a position that we shall not be able to 
recognise the labours of others in the same field. We must, while we suf- 
ficiently regret the dead, not leave ourselves unable to recognise the good 
and laudable work of the living; and it is for this reason that we should 
direct attention to recent labourers in the same field, and especially to the 
active labours of Dr. Masters, now before us. 
Before the time of Henfrey, it may well be said that there was no teacher 
of elementary botany in England. There was, of course, Balfour’s work, 
and Schleiden’s admirable treatise, translated by Dr. Lankester; but while 
the first was a simple, practical summary of the state of knowledge, the 
latter was a different work, containing very fully the author’s able views of 
some questions like that of fecundation, but very deficient in other par- 
* “An Elementary Course of Botany, Structural, Physiological, and 
Systematic.” By Professor Arthur Ifenfrey, F.R.S. Second edition, 
revised and in part rewritten by Maxwell T. Masters, M.D., F.B.S. Lon- 
don : Van Voorst, 1870. 
