THERE comes up periodically the attack upon botanical terminology. This criticism possesses the merit of age and of popularizing the very terms which it seeks to destroy ; otherwise, it has little substance. It is true that the technical terms are always obscure to those unacquainted with the science to which they belong, but such persons are not called upon to use them. They are never troublesome to the scientist, to whom they belong, and who alone must pass upon the merits of them. Science must have a technical language or it at once ceases to be science or exact knowledge.

But it is urged that these botanical terms are derived from the Latin and Greek and other tongues. So in the English language. Their classical form is one of their chief virtues, for it allows of their incorporation in other languages with but trifling modifications. Those who have occasion to read German technical works may well wish that that language had also drawn upon the Latin and Greek for its terminologies! No English words exist which could express the ideas briefly and clearly; and when new words are to be made, it matters little about source, for it is only through use that they become English. To substitute a new terminology for the old, as some have urged, would be to begin all over again and to naturalize a new vernacular as cumbersome as the old.

It is urged again that names should be illustrative, that they should "mean something." But it should be remembered that terms have meanings only when associated with some particular thought: they possess no intrinsic worth beyond their mere histories. It would be impossible to explain or even indicate the niceties of scientific thought by single words, and when phrases are used we at once invite confusion. What possible terms can be easier and better than dioecious, polygamous', proterandrous? It is an easy matter to make ridiculous and amusing examples of scientific terminology ; but it is quite another thing to devise a better system.

WHAT a sorry time some of the experiment stations appear to be having in getting up their bulletins ! Some of the bulletins are positively repulsive because of the entire lack of all attractive mechanical features. Talk as much as we will about the importance of truth unadorned, it is still true that the public wants even this precious* commodity dressed out in a stylish suit. It has lately been said that the bulletins lack good editorial features, and it is the most pertinent criticism which has yet been made upon station work. Poor paper, poor press-work, poor type, jack-knife illustrations, absence of method, and grammatical and rhetorical gymnastics, cannot make a good bulletin, no matter how valuable the facts may be. Numbers of the bulletins have little method, and are not attractively written. A bulletin before us announces upon its first page that the subject is to be discussed in four divisions, but one of the divisions cannot be found in the text, while an extra one is added. And it is almost the exception to find a bulletin in which the arrangement of head lines and divisions is logical and perspicuous.

But what shall we say of the composition ! We had intended to make a collection of the unconscious inaccuracies, obscurities and absurdities of expression, but the task is too great even for the scissors and paste-pot. " I advise those whose trees are suffering," writes one, "to dig holes by the side of them, fertilize them and, after several weeks, transplant in these holes, cutting them back severely." We should be pleased to receive a sample hole, cut back as directed !

Then there are the interminable tables, which bristle with figures and which are seldom read. A concise, condensed and perspicuous table is always useful but it is not often found. Writers seem to forget, or never to have known, that tables should present conclusions, that they are not the proper vehicles in which to record popular observations. Or if it should happen that certain extended matter is best stated in tables, then a short and direct summary or conclusion should follow. A farmer wants to plant a vineyard, and he sends for grape bulletins. He finds the merits of varieties expressed in tabular form with no summaries. He finds that one is "late and firm," another "best when trained on an arbor," another "specially good for post training," another "very good when well grown," another "a partial failure this year," and so on. He throws his bulletins aside and goes over to ask neighbor Jones, who never saw a bulletin and never heard of an experiment station, what kind of grapes to plant!

* *

WHY not have horticultural institutes ? There is no reason why institute work should not be profited by division of labor, especially as most fruit or truck-growing regions possess comparatively few interests of a general agricultural character. A horticultured institute in an horticultural country, a dairy institute in a dairy community, a grain-growers' institute in a grain-growing territory should accomplish more than mixed institutes. With the greater activity and specialization in agricultural pursuits comes a greater demand for exact teaching. So we are looking for more special institutes, more "special courses" in this universal farmers' college. The instructors must be the best specialists that can be obtained. Money and energy judiciously spent in institute work always pay a large dividend.

The first state horticultural institute yet held, so far as we know, convened at Oswego, New York, last spring. It was in every way a success, notwithstanding the fact that the horticultural interests of the section are comparatively new. Two general institutes held shortly before in the same city had indicated what the growers could expect in the way of instruction. The success of this first endeavor was so marked that other horticultural institutes will be held in the Empire State during the coming winter. Let other states follow.

*

ONE of the most urgent needs of the fruit grower and vegetable gardener at present is organization. There are several vital interests which demand union of action. Study of markets and transportation for the purpose of making a judicious distribution of products and to lessen cost of carriage, must demand first attention. It is only through united action that insects and fungous pests can be overcome, and that legislation can be influenced in a proper way are derived from proper nouns.

Hon. Edwin Willits, Assistant Secretary of Agriculture, has been placed in charge of the government exhibit at the World's Fair. This is the best appointment that could have been made, and assures a broad and comprehensive management of what must be the most important showing at the Columbian Exposition.

Henry L. Vilmorin, of the old and well-known seed firm of Vilmorin, Andrieux et Cie., of Paris, has been making a hasty trip through the east, visiting customers and examining our horticultural industries. His firm is a large exporter to and importer from the United States.

T. T. Lyon, president of the Michigan Horticultural Society, and one of the best pomologists in the land, has been appointed a permanent special agent of the National Division of Pomology. He will attend the various meetings of state and other horticultural societies, pomological fairs and exhibitions, and will gather and disseminate all the information possible by participating in the discussions and by examining and collecting specimens. He will probably have some special work in the line of reciprocity and co-operation with the national, state and local horticultural societies. This will greatly popularize the work of the division.