sity of fostering botanical investigation. It is fundamental and a matter second hardly to none in importance for a Government like the United States to undertake. I am not endeavoring to speak upon the different sites which have been proposed, but I would like to see a botanical garden established here of size commensurate with the needs of the Nation. The development of a mere park in Washington is a local matter. It can be enjoyed only by persons who are in Washington as residents or persons in Washington as citizens; but a botanical garden has a national influence and a national importance. Its activities should extend throughout the entire country. It has got to be located in some place, and naturally the National Capital is the fitting place. The CHAIRMAN. Is your botanical garden under the jurisdiction or control of your park commission? Dr. GAGER. No, sir; we articulate with the Government of greater New York through the office of the park commissioner; but he has no jurisdiction whatever except to transmit communications from and to the Botanic Garden and the other departments. The CHAIRMAN. Who controls its management? Dr. GAGER. It is controlled by a board of trustees, a trustee organization which has entire power of administrative appointments and supplies and a large part of the funds for maintenance. The CHAIRMAN. Have you finished your statement, Dr. Gager? Mr. MOORE. Senator, I would like to have Mr. Hess to address the committee. STATEMENT OF MR. GEORGE W. HESS, DIRECTOR UNITED STATES BOTANICAL GARDEN, WASHINGTON, D. C. Mr. HESS. Mr. Chairman, the area occupied by the Botanic Garden at present, I admit, is entirely too small. It should be located on a site where it could have at least 300 or 400 acres in order to bring the United States Botanical Garden up to date. As far as experimenting on fruit, blueberries, and things of that sort, as connected with the Botanic Garden, I have always considered that entirely sepa rate. We have seen that botanic gardens, in their origin, were based on utility. This is perhaps the best distinction that can be made between their function and that of the public garden or park, where plants are grown primarily for purposes of ornament or shade. The essential difference is apt to become blurred, especially in the case of botanic gardens situated near to towns, and needs to be reemphasized from time to time. There is no reason why botanie gardens can not or should not be ornamental, but this should be strictly subsidiary to their main purpose. What. then, are the proper functions of a botanic garden, large or small, in the neighborhood of a great city, or in a small tropical island? First, there is the scientific function. New plants are introduced from other climates and other lands, and these are grown and studied so as to discover whether they are capable of adaptation to their new surroundings and whether they are likely to be of value, economic or esthetic. Second, only perhaps to plant introduction should be the maintenance, so far as it is possible, of a representative collection of the more interesting and useful plants of the surrounding country, and especially of species allied to those in cultivation. The latter are of great interest to the taxonomist, to the plant breeder, and to the pathologist, because of the likenesses and differences they exhibit in comparison with the species grown for use. In a cotton-growing island, for example, nothing could be more appropriate or more useful, so far as botanic gardens go, than a representative collection of the native cottons, many types of which are in process of extermination owing to increasing strictness regarding close seasons. With them, it is quite conceivable, may be lost characters or qualities which would some day prove highly valuable. Again, botanic gardens afford botanical students opportunity for research in plant biology and pathology. One can hardly place a limit to the benefits that agriculture and horticulture have derived and may derive from researches in this direction. Our modern science of genetics, for instance, is derived from the studies of Mendel in a monastery garden in the last century. By work on the lines indicated by his discovery, races of useful plants are being multiplied and modified so as to be more exactly suited to the variable conditions in which economic plants are grown an to produce far greater crops than their ancestors. Studies which lead to such results can best be carried on in botanic gardens, where there ought to be found a greater amount of material and more scientific appliances than are possible in most private establishments. Besides the scientific function of botanic gardens, there is their educational aspect. In an article on this subject in Science it is well remarked that the notion that knowledge can be acquired from books is too prevalent; the idea that one can read about nature and thus acquire knowledge of nature is as misleading as to suppose that one can acquire knowledge of business by reading about business. We must distinguish between information and knowledge. Information may be obtained by reading, but knowledge can only be acquired by contact with and experience of realities. Hence, botanic gardens open to the public a source of real knowledge of plants, and there is no more pressing problem to-day than to learn how to grow plants and how to grow them in increasing quantities and of increased value in every possible situation. If made without insight into plant nature, efforts in this direction pass through a period in which knowledge is acquired through painful experience, very often with failure as the ultimate result. The above is quoted from an article which appeared in the Agricultural News, a fortnightly review of the imperial department of agriculture for the West Indies. I visited the Mount Hamilton tract with Mr. Moore, and my observation of it leads me to believe that it is very well suited for the purposes of a botanic garden, although I think we could select a better site. I would rather see it located in the northwest, if possible. The CHAIRMAN. Are you in favor of having an extensive botanic garden? Mr. HESS. Yes, Senator; I would like to see the Botanic Garden on a larger scale, of a size commensurate with the needs of the country. The CHAIRMAN. You admit that the present location can not be enlarged and the improvement of the Mall carried out according to plans. Mr. Hess. No; not if the improvement is carried out according to plans. The CHAIRMAN. You heard what Senator Williams said about the greenhouses and what he called the flower gardens. Mr. HESS. I did: yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Do you agree with him? Mr. HESS. I would not like to say, Senator, as I believe it is a matter to be decided by Congress. The CHAIRMAN. All right; the greenhouses in your present location are entirely inadequate with the plans you have, are they not? Mr. HESS. They are. We have a magnificent collection of plants, and it is too bad to have them crowded in as they are. Senator KNOX. If they carry out the plans' of the Fine Arts Commission to have the Mall extend from the Capitol down to the Lincoln Memorial, will not those greenhouses have to go? Mr. Hess. I did not understand you. Senator KNOX. Would not the greenhouses have to go eventually if the plan to extend the Mall from the Capitol down to the Lincoln Memorial is carried out? Mr. HESS. Yes, sir; they would have to go, and it would destroy a valuable collection of plants, because some of those magnificent palms are 100 years old; they are not in tubs, but are planted in the ground of the conservatory, and I am afraid they would be destroyed; I do not think we could move them.1 The CHAIRMAN. Do you know of any other place which could be made available as a site for the Botanical Garden other than those that have been discussed, especially in the Northwest section? Mr. HESS. No, Senator; I can not say that I do. I have thought that the land that was formerly occupied by Camp Meigs might make a splendid location, although I do not know what the acreage is. Mr. MOORE. Would it have advantages over the Mount Hamilton tract? Mr. HESS. Only that it would be more accessible. Less money would be required for grading purposes. Another thing I want to mention is that I do not want to see the fence taken down until Congress has decided upon a permanent location where we can take care of the plants. The CHAIRMAN. Do you think the provision in the sundry civil bill as passed by the House relating to the fence is a proper one? Mr. HESS. Yes, sir; of course, it is necessary to remove part of the fence, but I do not want to see any more of the fence removed than is absolutely necessary until some provision is made to take care of our plants. The CHAIRMAN. Now, is there anybody else, Mr. Moore? STATEMENT OF COL. C. S. RIDLEY, SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS; SECRETARY AND EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS. Col. RIDLEY. I have nothing to say in addition to what has been said except I would like to read some letters which have been received from various persons; or, if you desire, in the interest of saving time, I will insert them in the record. The CHAIRMAN. You might just state the contents briefly and let them be inserted in their entirety in the record. Col. RIDLEY. I have a letter here from Dr. George D. Moore, the director of the Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, in which he expresses his regret at not being able to be present. The CHAIRMAN. They all advocate the project, do they not?' Col. RIDLEY. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Well, they speak for themselves. Mr. JOHNSON. What project do you speak of? Col. RIDLEY. The project of an enlarged botanical garden. The CHAIRMAN. Does he advocate any particular location? Col. RIDLEY. No, sir. The CHAIRMAN. I will ask you to put those letters in the record. Are they all in favor of an enlarged botanical garden? 1 Palms of this size have been moved. Col. RIDLEY. They are all in favor of an enlarged botanical garden. Also I wish to say that I am in favor of the proposed site at Mount Hamilton. The CHAIRMAN. Have you looked at any of the other proposed sites or suggested sites? Col. RIDLEY. The only other site that has been proposed has been the project in Rock Creek Park, and that, I think, would be a very serious mistake. That is brought out very clearly in the report which you have asked to be printed. Some persons have advocated that, but it would be a great mistake because it would spoil Rock Creek Park by ruining its essential character. The CHAIRMAN. What do you think of the location suggested by Mr. Hess? Col. RIDLEY. Camp Meigs? The CHAIRMAN. Yes; what do you think of that? Col. RIDLEY. I do not think that would offer at all the variety of exposure and soil that would be necessary. I think we might put the greenhouses there, but even that would be bad. The CHAIRMAN. You would have to change the character of a great deal of the soil at Mount Hamilton when you went to grade? Col. RIDLEY. Of course, the plans for the development at Mount Hamilton have not been gone into in detail; but very little grading would have to be done there, only enough to adapt the road systems and the other development to the present contours. I think it would be very desirable to leave the present contours as far as beauty is concerned. Mr. MOORE. Mr. Langdon's computations show that there are 40 acres of level land in the Mount Hamilton tract where greenhouses could be built. (The letters submitted by Col. Ridley are as follows): Mr. CHARLES MOORE, THE MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN, 1729 New York Avenue, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. MOORE: It was a matter of deep regret to me that I was compelled to wire you that I would be unable to attend the hearing set for May 21. I have been away for 10 days and various important matters necessitate my staying in St. Louis until after the 22d. Practically any date after this would have suited me but it will be absolutely impossible for me to leave St. Louis next week, I was anxious to appear before the committee, not only because of any information I might have been able to give concerning the local situation, but also that I might point out the need and scope of a truly national botanical garden. My feeling is that the Government has neglected a real opportunity here and that the benefits of a national garden, properly organized and administered, would reach far beyond any show place which might be maintained in Washington. The Royal Botanic Garden with its headquarters at Kew, England, and the Imperial Garden of Berlin are two striking examples of what organizations of this kind can do and, with certain fundamental modifications, I hope very much that the proposed garden at Washington may ultimately develop along these lines. Some scheme of cooperation between existing gardens such as the New York Botanic Garden, the Arnold Arboretum, and the Missouri Botanical Garden, ought to be devised and in addition it would certainly be desirable to look forward to ultimately having other small gardens, closely affiliated with the national garden, established in other parts of the country. These would be selected chiefly on geographical lines to afford natural climatic conditions for certain kinds of plants. A national bontanical garden, such as I have in mind, would not in any way conflict with the purpose and function of existing gardens. On the other hand, it would be of tremendous assistance to them and, with the resources of the Government behind it, be capable of performing an important service to the country at large, which could not be accomplished otherwise. Again regretting my inability to be present at the hearing, and with best wishes, I am, Yours, very truly, GEORGE D. MOORE, Director. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Mr. CHARLES MOORE, Chairman the Commission of Fine Arts. DEAR MR. MOORE: Responding to your kind invitations of the 11th and 15th instant that I be present at the hearing before the Senate Committee on the Library on the 21st at 10 a. m., to discuss the question of the relocation of the Botanic Garden and the enlargement of that work, also that I attend a conference on the same subject at the office of the commission the 20th instant at 10.30 a. m.. I regret that it will not be possible for me personally to attend. I shall take pleasure, however, in having this department represented both at the conference and the hearing, probably by the Chief of the Bureau of Plant Industry and Messrs. Fairchild, Coville, and Swingle, who will present a statement of the view of this department regarding the matter and be prepared to discuss such features as may be pertinent. Very truly, yours, E. MEREDITH, Secretary. AMERICAN CIVIC ASSOCIATION, Mr. CHARLES MOORE, Chairman Commission of Fine Arts, 1729 New York Avenue, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. MOORE: Yours of May 12 is at hand this morning, telling me of the hearing before the Joint Committee on the Library in reference to the relocation and enlargement of the Botanic Garden, on Friday, May 21. I would be very glad to be present on this occasion if I had not made a definite engagement for the same day near Philadelphia-an engagement which it would be exceedingly difficult to break or postpone, because of the impending departure for California of the business friend I am to meet. I am in very hearty sympathy with the plan for a national botanic garden, and I have had some consultation with those interested as to the Mount Hamilton site, which appeals to me as a very excellent place at which to begin this great enterprise. I have a slight acquaintance with other important national gardens, particularly Kew Gardens at London, and more especially with the Arnold Arboretum at Boston. I would be glad, if in my absence, you felt inclined to quote me not only on behalf of the American Civic Association but on behalf of the American Association of Nurserymen (of the arboretum committee, of which I am a member) and of the American Rose Society, as most earnestly favoring the enterprise itself and the place of its location as thus suggested. Handled as a broadly conceived enterprise, such a garden can be of immense value to the people of the United States. The recently imposed quarantine No. 37, operated by the Federal Horticultural Board, which cuts off completely the ordinary amateur and scientific investigation of the flora of the world outside America, save under restrictions and regulations which are tantamount to complete exclusion, makes more definitely essential a well-conducted botanic garden and arboretum to which may be brought for trial, study, and eventual dissemination, if found worth while, the plants of other climates desirable both for food and for ornament. In fact, without some such action, or in its absence |