Germany and the Protection of Nature

Abstract

THE German intellect has a wonderful turn for organic science. Its achievements in this sphere are admittedly unrivalled, and the workers may be counted by the thousand. Such names as Hofmeister, Haeckel, Virchow, Weismann, Sachs, Pfeffer, and Verworn are only a fraction of one per cent, of the list. Consider, for instance, the contributions to a single department, as shown annually in Just's “Botanische Jahresberichte.” The typical English attitude, on the other hand, to nature, and especially to organic life, is hardly that of sympathetic study. It may rather be described as amused, or patient, condescension. This patronising habit receives its only modification in the case of “sporting” animals, or the more spectacular birds and mammals; and these are but the materials for a “show,” pour passer le temps. The Press pours out a flood of “nature books,” as the factories pour out toys, to amuse the children. Popularisation is the curse of the age. An up-to-date book on any branch of organic science is not to be found. Instead of a regular issue of sane, scientific accounts of progress, we have outlines for the use of schools, or productions the aim of which is the titillation or excitement of the unintelligent by means of the illustrations, if it cannot be done by the text. Work that does count appears not more often than once in a decade. It is consequently soon out of date. Such books, moreover, are generally too encyclopaedic, and their allocation to different departments is far from being scientifically impartial. The various meanings of the term “nature” supply a most interesting studv: a corollary may be found in the meanings of the term “natural history.” If so vague and obsolete a term is still to be used it should connote the science of all nature, as did the good old phrase “natural philosophy.”