403 
TOPULAR SCIENCE REVIEW. 
ticulars. Then about thirteen years ago came the valuable work, now in 
its second edition, and from its date came a revolution in English teaching. 
Perhaps of the few who are working at botany generally, no one was 
more thoroughly qualified to take up the work and bring it down to the 
present period than Dr. Masters. And as the work of the preparation of 
new editions goes on, we must congratulate him upon the clear good sense 
which influenced him in leaving the great bulk of the volume as it was before. 
Indeed, with the exception of the portion devoted to the description of the 
natural orders, we do not observe much change in the work j and for this 
we beg to offer our best thanks to the learned editor, for he has seen how 
very far in advance of the mere botanist the former author of the work was, 
and has recognised it accordingly. It is especially, as far as we can see, in 
regard to the description of the natural orders, that the author of the new 
edition has had the part to play, and so far he has done his work well and 
modestly. Dr. Masters’ work has been both laborious and well executed. 
While he has admitted a great many orders, which, if our memory serves us, 
were not there before, he has been cautious in doing so, and has not 
admitted more than the mere necessity of the occasion demanded. Fur- 
thermore, he has been terse in all cases, — no mean quality in an editor. 
The great bulk of the work is as it was before. In certain cases many 
additions have been made, in others hardly any. But in all respects we must 
regard Professor Ilenfrey’s treatise as being the very best text-book on 
botanical science which our language possesses. 
HUMAN HISTOLOGY.* 
TUTTHIN the past five or six years how very little good work has been 
' » done in this country in Histology ! It is strange that with the best 
kinds of microscopes, and the cheapest in the world, we have done so little 
in histology. We cannot understand why so much good work comes from 
abroad, where microscopes are dearer and worse, as a rule, than ours, unless 
it be that education is so far ahead of us. But yet why should that prevent 
large bodies, like the Royal Microscopical Society and the Quekett Club, 
from undertaking the labour ? We cannot tell. But there is no denying the 
fact that for the one worker at human histology in England there are, on a 
moderate estimate, from three to five abroad. Even taking the men who 
have contributed to the preeent volume alone, we find over thirty who, so 
far as we can remember, are from that part of the world which rejoices 
in the name of a fatherland. And where is what we are to show from 
England ? 
But if we leave aside for the present the question of comparison, and 
inquire on what this volume proposes to treat, we find that its subject 
* “Manual of Human and Comparative Histology.” Edited by S. 
Strieker. Vol. I. Translated by Henry Power, M.B., F.R.C.S., Examiner 
in Physiology in the University of London. The New Sydenham Society. 
London: 18/0. 
