« AnteriorContinuar »
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 24, 1891.
that are as well established as a thing can be in the uncertainties of the relative rank of vegetable organisms. The struggle of literary botanists to bring the law of
priority into operation has, as will presently be shown, BOTANICAL NOMENCLATURE.
resulted in successsive changes in nomenclature, each one Revisio Genera Plantarum Vascularium omnium, atque carrying his investigations a little further than his prede
Cellularium multarum, secundum Leges Nomenclaturæ cessors, and extending the backward limit of authority Internationales, cum Enumeratione Plantarum in for the establishment of genera and species, until the Itinere Mundi collectarum. Mit Erläuterungen von whole thing has drifted into a lamentable and undignified Dr. Otto Kuntze. Pp. 1011. (London : Dulau and race between persons who deal in dates, and are even Co., 1891.)
prepared to make all sorts of evasions of ordinary rules THE "HE importance of tbis subject is so great, and the in order to gratify their craze for reviving old names. alterations made in this book so revolutionary (al
It is hardly necessary to say that these successive though the author pretends to be guided by "international changes, apart from the great divergencies as to the rules "), that a brief sketch of the recent history of plant- limitations of genera and species, have a most deterrent naming is desirable in order to render any criticisms of effect on the progress of the study of systematic botany, the work generally intelligible ; and it is all the more and make it ridiculous in the eyes of persons who regard called for because Dr. Kuntze specially attacks the a name as merely a means to an end. position taken up by a considerable section of English In 1867 a Botanical Congress was held in Paris, to botanists.
which botanists of all countries had been invited, and From the time of the foundation by Linnæus of the the most important subject discussed was botanical binominal system of nomenclature, which cannot be said nomenclature. Mr. A. de Candolle had drawn up a to have been consummated before the publication of the most carefully considered code of rules lo govern botanfirst edition of the “Species Plantarum” in 1753, down ists in their writings; and this code was submitted to to within the last 25 or 30 years, matters proceeded with the assemblage of botanists, each rule being formulated tolerable smoothness, though some influential botanists and modified as the majority deemed wise. Finally, the did not scruple to ignore the published names of their whole was printed and circulated. The fundamental contemporaries, or alter them on the most trivial | principle of these laws was priority of publication with grounds; and there was almost universal laxity in citing | adequate descriptions, and unfortunately it was made retroauthorities. But the more critical investigation of the spective, without any sufficiently defined statute of limitaEuropean flora especially, and to some extent also, per- tions. For reasons of their own, the Kew botanists took haps, the tendency to multiply species, led to a more no part in the proceedings of this Congress; whether thorough exainination of the literature, resulting in the wisely or not it would be difficult to determine, and fruitdiscovery that the same genus or species had often been less to discuss. Of course, their position was open to described and named by more than one writer, the names comment and criticism, which have not been wanting ; being usually different. Furthermore the limitation of and Dr. Kuntze, while expressing his admiration of the many of the genera founded by Linnæus and others amount and quality of the work done at Kew, deplores was greatly modified, some by narrower circumscription, the fact that little regard has been paid to remote and others by amplification, according to the opinions and obscure priorities. So far he is fair enough ; but when inclinations of the writers; and of course it frequently he imputes unworthy motives to Bentham, he commits a happened that different writers dealt with the same great mistake, and does grievous injustice to the memory materials independently of, and unknown to each other. of a man whose sole aim was to advance botanical Some of these new genera and species were described or science, and especially that branch to which he had proposed in publications of merely local circulation, and devoted his life, and which is most intimately bound up were overlooked by the majority of botanists, and others with nomenclature. No doubt the authors of the “Genera seem to have been purposely neglected ; so that in many plantarum” failed to take up a large number of published instances the current and commonly accepted names generic names; and not being bound down by the law of were of more recent publication than those of other priority, they were not always consistent, even from the authors. As there appeared to be no way out of the point of view of expediency and convenience, as the survivpractice of citing the author of a given combination of ing author would readily admit. But to suggest that they generic and specific names, it followed that the only fair would not conform strictly to the rule of priority because procedure would be to adopt the name and give credit to they would have to undo much of their own work is as the man who first published a change generally accepted; disingenuous as it is untrue. The first volume of the because the presumption was that it was always possible, “Genera Plantarum” was not completed till 1867, the and usually probable, that the later author was aware of “Flora Australiensis” was less than half done, and the the earlier publication. If an author published later Flora of British India” was not commenced; so that, if than another, his names must be relegated to the syno- the authors had had a longing for change and cheap nymy. This is all very well in theory, and is not so very notoriety, they might have re-named a third of the flowerdifficult to put into practice, so far as recent writers are ing plants of the world. But their idea was to maintain concerned, once we have proved the identity of plants genera and species, as they had been gradually built up, under different names; but when we come to the older under current names. The opinion of the late Mr. writers, all sorts of doubts and ambiguities arise, and it | Bentham on this point is clear from the following passeems much better to retain generic and specific names sage (Journ, Linn. Soc., xix., p. 19) in his “Notes on the Gramineæ”-the last of the natural orders elaborated binations of 0. K. (Dr. Kuntze). It is no disparagement for the “Genera Plantarum”:
to the literary researches of Dr. Kuntze to say that Mr. “Much has been done, however, for the elucidation Kuntze, if it had been desirable to do it. But it was
Jackson was in a position to do this infinitely better than of the order in local Floras. Already at the close of the last century and the commencement of the
never a part of the plan that the compiler should reduce present one, several Continental botanists proposed synonymy, and amend the nomenclature of plants. His new genera' for anomalous European grasses; but task has been to prepare an index, and as such its value these were published in works which entered but will far exceed any attempts at finality in synonymy. To little into general circulation, and were overlooked by have proceeded on the lines of Steudel would have only Beauvois, Persoon, Willdenow, and other systematists. resulted in the addition of many thousands of names Several of the same genera have since been re-established, but under other names which have now been so
devoid of all authority. Nevertheless, Dr. Kuntze, being long and so universally adopted, that they must be con- so impressed with the importance of his precious names, sidered as having acquired a right of prescription to declares that the index will have no scientific value unless overrule the strict laws of priority. It would indeed be it include the 30,000 specific names appropriated by mere pedantry, highly inconvenient to botanists, and so
“ O. K.” without more labour than a mere transfer. Dr. far detrimental to science, now to substitute Blumen. bachia for Sorghum, Fibichia for Cynodon, Santia for
Kuntze worked at Kew for several years, and enjoyed the Polypogon, or Sieglingia for Triodia.”
usual privileges of the establishment, and the exceptional
privilege of consulting the index in question ; and he now It is idle to argue that two or three persons have no very magnanimously dedicates a genus to the compiler, and right to make laws; for any corporation, however small, patronizingly tells him he hopes he will take proper advanthas that right, and is justified in exercising it if it has the age of the researches and superior wisdom of the author. power to carry them into effect. But, after all, the main The extent to which these changes have been made may question is, whether the Kew botanists acted in the interest be gathered from the author's own summary, in which he of science in declining to be guided by the rules passed states that he has reduced 151 genera ; separated off 6 by another body of botanists ; and I think any unpreju- genera ; re-named 122 genera, because they bore names diced outsider would agree that they did, and that the homonymous with other genera ; restored 952 genera in course events have taken has strengthened their posi- accordance with the laws of priority; and re-named uption.
wards of 30,000 species belonging to these genera! How It should be remembered that most of the advocates of he justifies these changes may be learnt from a few expriority, and especially those advocates of almost un amples, selected to illustrate the various extraordinary qualified priority, such as Dr. Kuntze, have no respon- devices employed by a writer who professes to be anisibility beyond literary accuracy, and even that cannot be mated by a sincere desire to reform and consolidate maintained for such uncertain quantities as orders, botanical nomenclature. We may waive for the moment genera, and species of plants. On the other hand, the another phase of the question-how far can botanists botanists of Kew have grave responsibilities towards the accept these identifications, even if they are prepared to general public. It is not too much to say that Kew is accept the principle ? Astragalus, a genus of more than almost exclusively responsible for the botanical nomen- a thousand species, is to be superseded by Tragacantha, clature current in gardens, and in English and colonial because the latter name was published by Linnæus in his literature dealing with plants or the products of plants, earlier crude “Systema” (1735), though in his revised and to say nothing of the vast named collections at Kew. improved work he preferred and employed the former. The labour of renaming the plants in accordance with Kuntze says, in fact, that no author can be permitted to the investigations of successive reformers would have revoke any previously published name of his own making, been as nothing to the folly of doing so, though it would any more than those of another person ; and accordingly have been a herculean task, and a recurring task, as each he transfers page after page of names from Astragalus to older name was disinterred. The idea of giving a gar- | Tragacantha, with the appended authority,“ O. K.” Other dener, or a manufacturer, or any person interested in familiar large genera treated in the same way are: Erica, vegetable products, one of these resuscitated generic | which becomes Ericodes, on an even less tenable ground; names with a specific name tacked on to it by a person Pelargonium has to cede to Geraniospermum; and Clema. who has done nothing else except put his initials to it, is tis receives an additional syllable, and in future we must too absurd. All the literature connected with the plant say Clematitis. Recent authors have combined Rhodois under another name, all the figures likewise, and, one dendron and Azalea under the former, but Kuntze now might add, all the persons almost who know anything gives them all names under the latter. Proceeding to exabout the plant, know it by the old name. Yet, forsooth, amples of more far-fetched changes, it may be noted that we are asked to sacrifice everything that belongs to the Cleistanthus is to be Kaluhaburung hos, though it was only present for the sake of a “principle” that involves endless the other day that Dr. Trimen discovered that a plant in confusion, and feeds the vanity of the living more than it | Herrmann's herbarium, bearing this name, which was honours the dead. Of course priority in current work is taken up by Linnæus in his “ Flora Zeylanica," was the a totally different thing ; but if it had been the intention same as Cleistanthus acuminatus. Dr. Trimen also of the promoters of the new “ Index to Plant Names," on identified Gaedawakka as of the same origin with Chætowhich Mr. Daydon Jackson and his assistants have been carpus, therefore Kuntze restores the former. Another engaged for some ten years, to restore these old generic excuse for changing names is the existence of two of the names, and enumerate the species thereunder, it would same derivation. Thus Glaucium cannot be tolerated by now be necessary to cite some 30,000 of them as the com- the side of Glaux, and Kuntze takes the opportunity of dedicating the genus to his “ dear sister Mary and her taken from Ray's “Catalogus Plantarum circa Cantahusband Franz Mosenthin," and we get the new name brigiam nascentium.” This, not because these authors Vosenthinia. Some other names of the same deriva- had any idea of a binominal nomenclature, but because tion are sufficiently distinct to avoid confusion, yet the ordinary diagnostical phrase of the period happened Kuntze says they must be treated as homonyms. To to be reduced to two words. Of course, if we admit this category belong Hydrothrix and Hydrotriche; con- species on this ground, we cannot logically date the sequently the former is re-named Hookerina, though a genera later ; and the same writer (“ Flora Franciscana”) Hookera exists and is accepted by our author, who also carries out the same principle for genera, and ascribes invents a Sirhookera! Failing any of the foregoing reasons, Lupinus to Catullus, Linum to Virgil, Euphorbia to an old name may be modified to conform to modern rules, Pliny, and Amygdalus to Theophrastus ! and then replace a current name. For example, Katouts- In a more recent article (Pittonia, ii. p. 185), Prof. jeroe goes through this process, and is issued as Catuts- Greene proposes new names for a number of what he jeron, otherwise Holigarna. In the same way Anil terms "revertible generic names "—that is, nanies which becomes Anila, and supplants Indigofera ; aju is length have at some period been applied to some other plants ened to Cajum, and supersedes Pongamia; and Kauken than those for which they are now current, no matter to Kaukenia, swallowing up Mimusops. A still more how remote the chance of revivals. On this principle he exasperating kind of change is the transfer of a familiar supersedes Pickeringia, Nutt., Nuttallia, Torr. and Gr., generic name to some other familiar genus; such as Darlingtonia, Torr., Crantzia, Nutt., Torreya, Arnott, and Armeria to Statice. It may be mentioned in passing others; and, as he asserts, with great regret. that the Plumbaginacea have fared badly at the hands One might go on multiplying instances of these unof this wholesale reformer. Acantholimon is referred to necessary changes, but it would only be wearisome. Armeriastrum ; Armeria to Statice ; Vogelia to Dyero- Still, I may give one or two examples of repeated changes, phyton, O. K. ; Limoniastrum to Limonioides, altered by and we are not sure that we are at the end. Sir Ferdinand O. K to Limoniodes.
Mueller, the eminent Australian botanist, reduced CanLovers of orchids will probably be long before they dollea, Labill., to Hibbertia (Dilleniaceæ), and replaced adopt the numerous changes effected in the generic Stylidium by Candollea, whilst Marlea, in Cornaceæ, names of their favourites. Den trobium is superseded by was replaced by the older name for the same genus, Callista, Eria by Pinalia, Saccolabium by Gastrochilus, Stylidium. Kuntze now discovers that Karangolum is Bulbophyllum and Cirrhopetalum by Phyllorchis, Pleuro- an older name for Marlea, therefore he reinstates Stylithallis by Humboldtia, and Angræcum by Angorchis-dium for the plants generally known under that name, the last by mistake, it would seem, for Angræcum is and Candollea of Dilleniaceæ is relegated back; though really older than the substitute. Why Epidendrum does in the meantime another compiler had invented the not fall is not explained ; for as now limited it does not name Eeldea for it, in spite of its having been reduced to contain one of the species of Linnæus's original Epiden- Hibbertia. One more instance : Nymphæa and Nuphar drum: and I believe that Vanilla would have to be are names familiar in their application to a large number named Epidendrum on the principle adopted by Kuntze. of persons outside of botanical circles, and there was no
There is another confusing element in these changes. objection to them until recently, when Mr. J. Britten Dr. Kuntze reinstates a number of Aublet's neglected or found that Nuphar ought to be Nymphæa, and the latter previously unrecognized genera, with modified spellings. Castalia, and he believed he had reached finality in the In this way Coumarouna and Tounatea become Cuma- matter ; but Kuntze now says that Castalia must fall, runa and Tunatea, giving them a widely distant position because the name Leuconymphæa was employed by in an index. On the other hand, Dr. Taubert has Ludwig in 1737. And so these changes go on. recently adopted the original spellings, and appropriated On the whole, I think it will be admitted that the Kew all the species, so that each species is now saddled with botanists have exercised a wise discretion in employing at least three names, in order that justice should be done current and familiar names in preference to these unto Aublet, who described one species of each genus ! certain and endless revivals; and I may say that the same
But Dr. Kuntze is not the only person who believes, policy will be pursued in the immediate future. If the -and conscientiously, I am convinced-that botanical advocates of change succeed in popularizing their ideas nomenclature can only be established on a firm basis of “right" and "justice” in the matter, then, no doubt, by absolute adherence to the rule of priority. As an Kew would follow, and not unwillingly. instance of the extremes to which some of the American There are endless difficulties in the way of taking up reformers and champions of priority and fixity go, I may genera anterior to the first edition of Linnæus's Species refer to the writings of Prof. E. L. Greene. With regard Plantarum,” and it seems only rational and consistent to the authorship of species, he contends (Pittonia, i. that binominal nomenclature should be based upon the p. 183) " that according to an acknowledged general | foundation of the system, and upon Linnæus's completed principle which governs men, or ought to govern them, work, rather than upon his, or other authors', earlier imin all literary work, whether scientific or general,” any perfect works. It is no breach of confidence to say that binominals now in use in the same form that they happen Mr. Daydon Jackson, who has been ten years engaged to occur in pre-Linnæan works, such as those of Ray, on Darwin's “ Index to Plant Names," has come to the Bock, Dodoens, Fuchs, and others, should be credited in conclusion that any attempt to adopt genera of an earlier all modern books, not to Linnæus, but to such of these date will lead to hopeless confusion, to say nothing of sixteenth century authors who first employed the com- inconvenience. binations; and he enumerates forty-eight examples There are some genuine cases of priority that one
f would rather not admit, because there is no advantage orward ; and now the best illustrations of theory are to gained by them and much confusion is caused, inasmuch be found in the behaviour of compressed air when used as one change often involves several others, and the as a motor-for instance, in tunnelling machinery, and in re-naming of large genera. According to the strict law, the Whitehead torpedo, or in the working of Refrigerating Pimelea should be Banksia, and so Kuntze re-names the Machines (chapter xxi.), now of such importance in the latter Sirmuellera.
New Zealand dead meat trade. It remains for botanists, who really write for the public, The Second Law of Thermodynamics is introduced in to decide whether, in a general way, it is not better to chapter iii., as a formal statement of Carnot's principle, employ current names; because it is perfectly ridiculous and this again as an experimental law. Statements of to vapour about the “scientific" value of names. We this law are of various kinds, but the two given here seem might as well attempt to purify the English language. to put the matter in as clear a light as possible :All we want is to know what plant is designated by a (1) All reversible engines, working between the same given name, and that is no easy matter, apart from other source of heat and refrigerator, have the same efficiency, complications.
i.e. the efficiency is independent of the working material. Since the foregoing was written, I have seen an article (2) A self-acting machine cannot convey heat from one (Botanical Gazette, November 1891, p. 318), by Mr. E. L. | body to another at a higher temperature. Rand, on Nomenclature from the Practical Standpoint,” This is almost equivalent to the convention that, of two in which he recommends the course followed by the Kew bodies, the one to which heat passes by conduction or botanists, without any reference to them, however, or to radiation has the lower temperature. Dr. Kuntze, whose work could not have reached America Sir W. Thomson's definition of an Absolute Scale of at that time. W. BOTTING HEMSLEY. Temperature is now deduced from Carnot's principle ;
and the correspondence of this scale with that given practically by the air thermometer is found to be so close
that they may be taken as coincident. APPLIED THERMODYNAMICS.
The theoretical advantages of Superheated Steam Thermodynamics of the Steam Engine and other Heat failures in their attempts at its employment, due to a
(chapter viii.) have led inventors to repeated and costly Engines. By Cecil H. Peabody, Associate Professor simple humble cause, the consequent destruction of the of Steam Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of dirty greasy film of lubricant, which keeps the working Technology. (London: Macmillan and Co., 1889.)
parts from cutting and seizing. UCH an important work as the present, on the inven- It is related that the introduction of the compound
tion which has completely changed in the course of principle (chapter xiii.) into marine engines was due to this century the conditions of human life, should not have an attempt at the employment of superheated steam, remained unnoticed so long, and an apology is due to the and that the removal of the superheaters revealed the author ; our excuse must be that the scope and power superiority of the compound engine. of the book are such as to arrest attention and to excite
The substance employed to do the work in a steam interest in all its various details.
engine is now invariably “Saturated Vapour” (chapter The work forms a noble companion to the “ Applied vii.), the worst substance to choose, according to the Mechanics of Prof. Lanza, the author's colleague; and precepts of pure Thermodynamics. the students of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology The Lawsof Saturated Vapourare empirical, and deduced are to be congratulated on their staff, and the possession from the experiments of Regnault. Here, as throughout of such admirable text-books, to direct their theoretical the book, the results are expressed in British units of the and practical studies.
foot and pound, while the gravitation unit of force is We find a great contrast here with the ordinary treatises employed, being the force of a pound in latitude 45o at on Thermodynamics to which we are accustomed, where sea-level. the subject is followed up to a great extent for its mathe- Prof. Rowland's latest determination of the Mechanical matical interest, and where little appeal is made to the Equivalent of Heat is used, namely 427*1, in Metric numerical illustrations on a large scale which we see Units of metre-kilogrammes per calorie at 163° C., or 778 taking place around us ; this treatise is written much foot-pounds. more in the style of Prof. Cotterill's “Theory of the Steam The Laws of the Flow of Fluids, investigated in Engine,” where the methods and results of the application chapter ix., are applied immediately to the theory of of Thermodynamics to engineering are developed. Giffard's beautiful invention, the Injector, in chapter x. The book commences with a general theory and formal
Working diagrams are given of all the principal variapresentation of Thermodynamics, as employed by the tions of the application of the Injector, an instrument in majority of writers (and beyond which they rarely travel), which a jet of steam, by reason of its excess of energy and follows the ordinary notation and treatment, but has and momentum, is capable not only of overcoming an the advantage of being illustrated by carefully drawn opposing jet of water from the same boiler, but also of diagrams of real curves and machines, with collections carrying with it, in a condensed form, a much larger of instructive numerical exercises taken from real ex
quantity of water, and thus feeding the boiler. Still more perience; the student can thus test the soundness of his paradoxical, even the exhaust steam of an engine can be knowledge as he proceeds.
made to perform the same office against a pressure several So long as we deal with the Theory of Perfect Gases, fold greater. The Injector is working to the best ad. the First Law of Thermodynamics will suffice to carry us vantage when feeding a boiler, as the heat of the steam
jet is returned back again and although the efficiency
BRITISH FLIES. is small, when compared with a pump, still the Injector has the advantage of working while the engine is at An Account of British Flies (Diptera). By the Hon. rest.
M. Cordelia E. Leigh, F.E.S., and F. V. Theobald, The same principle is applied occasionally in the
B.A., F.E.S. Vol. 1., Part I. (London : Elliot Stock, Water Injector and the Ejector, where, for instance, a large
1891.) body of water, in the form of leakage for water ballast, is THE reader involuntarily glances back at the title of
. A ment, although quite different in principle, is that called the front page are : “ One of the branches of science that the Pulsometer, which is really a revival of the Marquis of has advanced with rapid strides during recent years is Worcester's and Savory's Fire Engine, where the pres-geology...." To commence with Fossil Diptera, and to sure of steam acts directly on the surface of the water. enumerate the families (and some of the genera) memTo check the great condensation a piston was introbers of which are found preserved in the earth's strata, duced, and hence our modern steam engine.
before either families or genera have been in the least Hot Air Engines are described in chapter xi., and here degree defined, is a somewhat novel way of beginning. the mathematical theorems for Perfect Gases receive their When the work is completed, students will find it useful most beautiful applications, so that formal treatises on to transfer chapter i. to the end. The second chapter, Thermodynamics usually treat this part of the subject at entitled “ Classification of Diptera, with an introductory length. Our author dismisses it in about eight pages, account of the ancient and modern classification of with a short description of the principal systems, as, Insecta,” contains much matter of interest to entomounfortunately, all the practical objections against the logists in general, although it is questionable whether use of Superheated Steam are intensified tenfold in the authors have arranged their material in either the Hot Air Engine. Ericsson once fitted a steamer to the most attractive or the most methodical form. The cross the Atlantic with engines on this principle : they classification of the Diptera it is intended to follow is were very cumbrous although the boilers were dispensed that of Verrall, published in 1888, in which the order is with; and the experiment did not lead to further imita- divided into two great sections—the Orthorrhapha and tion. An exception must be made in favour of the Gas the Cyclorrhapha ; the Nematocera and Brachycera being Engine, as the only practical application of the Hot Air included in the former, and the Proboscidea with the Engine ; the author works out the theory, and comes to Eproboscidea in the latter. The Aphaniptera (now inthe remarkable conclusion that the efficiency of the Gas cluded in Nematocera) form the subject of the third Engine Cycle does not depend, as in ordinary Thermo- chapter, in the course of which this first part terminates. dynamics, on the difference of temperatures so much as The structure and metamorphosis of Pulex are discussed on the degree of expansion and compression.
at some length, and certain species are described in The author reaches the real part of his subject in detail. Some uncertainty seems to exist in the authors' chapter xii., where he discusses the theory of the Actual minds as to how many of them are engaged upon the Steam Engine, as we really find it working, in the mill, work, for they use both “we” and “l.” This calls to the mine, and on the railway or steamer.
recollection Cruikshank's picture, “In which there is Here Hirn appears as the great authority on the careful Antagonism of interest yet Mutuality of object.” records of what takes place in the actual engine (chapter It is not possible from a perusal of the first thirty-two xvii.).
pages to form a fair idea as to the general character of
the work. “The measurement of quantities of heat, especially be written for those who are already entomologists, a.
It may be stated, however, that it appears to when it has to be done in an engine at work, is an opera: familiarity with entomological science on the part of the tion of great difficulty; and it was not till 1862 that it was shown experimentally by Hirn that h, the heat emitted, reader being assumed by the authors. Considerable trouble is really less than H, the heat received by the engine" has evidently been taken in consulting authorities whose (Maxwell, “ Theory of Heat ”).
works are accessible only to the few. That there is The example of Hirn has been followed up of recent plenty of room for a good treatise on the British Diptera years by careful and long-continued experiments on
will readily be admitted, and if the authors should have steamers and pumping engines in regular work, and the something new to tell about such genera as Chlorops, results of the most important of these tests receive care
Oscinis, Cecidomyia, and Hylemyia, so much the better. ful description and analysis, in chapters xv.-xviii.; a
Part I. is illustrated by five woodcuts. preliminary chapter, xiv., giving a detailed account of the best procedure and instruments required in Testing
OUR BOOK SHELF. Steam Engines.
The book will be found indispensable, not only by Principles of Agriculture. Edited by R. P. Wright, designers of Steam Engines, but also by writers of
F.H.A.S. (London: Blackie and Son, 1891.) abstract treatises on Thermodynamics, as restraining The raison d'être of this little volume is to be found in their mathematical development within reasonable limits its“ tail,” where are reproduced the questions set in the of actuality, and as directing their analytical powers in a
Science and Art Department Examinations in the
Principles of Agriculture during the last eleven years. useful direction.
The title-page ought to state, but it does not, that this
is a revised edition of a book that was published some A. G. GREENHILL.
years ago. This fact is only discoverable from the
preface. The original edition was arranged in three