Reconstruction of Elementary Botanical Teaching 107 
propose that in order to secure improvement “ comparative 
morphology should be reduced to a subordinate position ” (p. 251). 
1 confess such a dictum from scientific men takes my breath away. 
I hope it is only a slip of the pen, and that they really mean 
“co-ordinate” and not “subordinate.” But five cultivated minds 
have committed themselves to the latter word. In order to secure 
their own Utopia they propose to “ subordinate ” something which 
they admit is good in itself. That is the spirit that has ruined 
Russia, and endangered the future of civilisation. Are the 
signatories prepared to follow a like course ? 
Co-ordination between the several branches of a science, as they 
emerge in the higher teaching, seems to be the only proper basis 
of advance. 1 agree to co-ordination of morpoholgy and physiology 
in advanced work, however little they can be separated in the 
elementary. These and other branches of the science should start 
equal and combined, as they now do in the north. Let the 
signatories then construct by their own enthusiastic work instead 
of attempting to destroy. The energy of their protest should be 
transmuted into fresh effort. I would say to them “ Physician 
heal thyself.” 
Meanwhile another author proposes a committee “to agree on 
a course of action”: the result to be communicated to the teachers 
of each University. None of us should be so self-satisfied that he 
would rule out all suggestion for improvement in the balance or 
character of his teaching. If such a Committee were formed, and 
I were privileged to see the results of its work, I should give them full 
consideration. Probably they would not affect my course material¬ 
ly, for it is already adjusted to the immediate conditions. The 
document would then find its way to the goal of many documents 
—better and worse. In other words, I think such a Committee 
without powers to standardise teaching would be superfluous, or 
one might also say impertinent: and 1 sincerely hope that powers 
of standardisation will never be acquired. Informal conversation, 
or perhaps even talking in ink like this discussion, will give better 
results. Finally, each teacher, with a due sense of his responsibility, 
and of his opportunities and requirements, must form his own 
scheme to meet his own needs. If he cannot do this, he is not fit 
for his position. 
I remain, 
Yours faithfully, 
F. O. BOWER. 
Glasgow, 
April, 1918. 
