The Michigan Alumnus
Volume XXIII.
October, 1916 -August, 1917
The Alumni Association of the University of Michigan
Publishers 
Alumni Memorial Hall Ann Arbor, Michigan
257
STUDYING THE SCIENCES FIFTY YEARS AGO
President Van Hise somewhere makes the remark that it is hard for
young people to realize that the person one hundred years old has seen
more progress in the conveniences of living than were made in ten thousand years before. During scarcely more than half that time nearly all
departments of science as taught in college have made most of their growth.
Even without the aid of an instructor Professor Winchell taught geology,
zoology and botany in the University of Michigan, and had considerable
spare time left for work in the museum and the study of those topics in
the field. In the spring of 1856 he met the sophomores daily for six weeks
in botany, training them without microscopes till they were reasonably
certain in identifying claytonia virginica, and lupinus perennis. This ended
instruction in botany. Zoology and geology were little more formidable.
Even these slight introductions to natural science left the writer with a
thirst for more in preference to more knowledge in Greek, Latin or mathematics. In 1859, I began teaching in an academy in Union Springs, New
York, to get money to pay the expense of further study at Harvard, where

258
I presented myself in 1862. Against my inclination, I decided to work in
chemistry because it would be more likely to help me in teaching. My
teacher was a tall circumspect young man, by the name of Charles W.
Eliot, whom you all heard of some years later. The start in analytical
chemistry received scarcely any helpful suggestions. Twice a week a
class of three of us were questioned on lessons in Cook's Chemical Physics
and Fowne's Organic Chemistry, without the slightest attempt at experiments or laboratory work, but were book lessons.

After about ten weeks of chemistry which by that time I thoroughly
disliked, I decided to quit and study zoology and botany, with Agassiz and
Gray whether they helped me or not; and I have never for a moment regretted the change.

Agassiz was glad to see me, "But why do you want to study zoology;
there is no money in it? You must make up your mind to be poor all
your life. I shall try your patience. You have read books on zoology, but
have not studied the objects. You must not read any books on the objects
you are studying." He gave me some dried sea urchins and assigned me to
a desk with drawers. "Tomorrow I will call to see how you are getting
along." There were nine other students, spending most of their time in
studying small animals. I had all the daylight for this work, interrupted by
two lectures a week. I used a cheap hand lens, note paper and pencil and
settled down for the task, breaking in pieces and sketching as I went along;
and by night I believed there was nothing more for me to learn. The next
day I was glad to see Agassiz saunter in with a smile, and the question,
"Well, Mr. Beal, what have you seen?" He saw the drawings and listened to my talk, saying, "This and this are right, that is wrong." He
gave me a few names and said, "Look it over," and with a call of five
minutes left me. This is a sample of his daily visits for three weeks. I
brought living specimens from Nahant, surprised myself by additional discoveries, becoming able to see the details when my eyes were shut as well as when open. Then he said, "Here are some star fishes to follow the sea
urchins. They are composed of similar parts, arranged in a similar manner, how is it?" After two days I was able to tell him. I studied and
compared related animals including some spatangoids. Every time a new
specimen was studied, I was told to compare them in detail. "It is easy
enough to observe isolated facts; any one can soon learn to do that, but
when you compare two or more objects, then you take a step in philosophy.
I want now to find out whether you are fit for a captain or a major general." Sometimes I made models of what I was studying.

I spent six weeks in studying and comparing a few marine animals
allied to the starfish and sea urchins, and during all this time Agassiz in
his brief calls never told me a thing except to say, "You are right, you are
wrong." In like manner I studied corals, fishes, mollusks, crabs and lobsters, and spent six weeks dredging and making notes at Eastport, Maine.
As time went on he talked a little more and mentioned something to
read. I was with Agassiz most of the time for a little more than a year, and
consider it the most valuable training I ever had in anything. In all my

259
teaching for fifty years I made use of this plan, adapted more or less to
the students in hand.
Dr. Gray was glad to assist me, but agreed with Agassiz that there was
little chance to make money, and if I became a teacher, I must make up my
mind that some of my students would surpass me, a condition of things that
long ago proved to be true. At that time (1862) a small number of students
of Agassiz found little demand for services, and of botanists there were only
two men in this country, Dr. Gray, of Harvard, and Professor Eaton, of
Yale, who earned their living by teaching botany. True, Dr. Torrey was
professor of botany of Columbia University, but he had to piece out his
salary by doing some assay work for the United States government.
By this time the reader must have concluded that my prospects for
success in natural history were not very bright, and wonder why I did not
give up the job. I never for a moment thought of such a thing. I was
continually joyous in the work. I had some hope for the future, but no
prophetic vision of what was to come, nothing like a dream of meeting 500-600 botanists, as was recently the case in New York. The work with Dr. Asa Gray was mostly in his private laboratory, where I was his only student
giving my time chiefly to the gross anatomy of seed plants, ferns and their
allies, aided by a stage microscope and free use of books, and Dr. Gray was
always ready to help over any difficulties, saying that "It wasn't worth while
to work under false ideas."

Tuition was $150 a year, but in my case there was no charge on the
ground that I was paying my own way. Some service was rendered by way
of collecting specimens for class use.

During one spring Dr. Gray met three of us for lessons in his text book
freely illustrated by fresh specimens. The botanical department of Harvard
did not own a compound microscope; it had the use of a thousand dollar instrument belonging to the Lowell Institute. A little crude work was done,
such as viewing the streaming motion of granules of chlorophyll in leaf-sections of valisneria, looking at grains of pollen, sections of ovules, etc.
During my time Dr. Gray gave a valuable course of illustrated lectures to
juniors in geographical botany. I attended popular lectures given by Professor Agassiz to undergraduates, lectures on elementary chemistry by Professor J. B. Cooke, another course on comparative anatomy by Dr. Jefferies
Wyman, several lectures by Professor James Russell Lowell, occasional lectures by Professor E. N. Hosford, Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Professor Lovering, Professor Benjamin Pierce, one by Emerson on the life of
Thoreau, one by Senator Charles Sumner, one by John B. Gough, one in
Tremont Temple by Wendell Phillips, the day after President Lincoln was
assassinated; three or four plays by young Edwin Booth, of whom Harvard
and Boston were very proud, one lecture by Artemus Ward, soon to leave
for Europe.

Those participating in Junior exhibitions were in black gowns, but
failed to draw a crowd.

At a lecture Dr. Wyman at one time exhibited a number of small
bottles containing boiled hay and other materials filtered after boiling, some
of which were still clear and others turbid. It had been found out that if

260
boiled three or four times the materials were more likely to remain clear.
Reference was made to spontaneous generation, and why boiling did not
destroy all traces of life. Here was the beginning of microbiology in
America.
When I left the University of Michigan in 1859, there was a grand
total of 430 students; on entering Harvard in 1862 there were 814, including divinity, law, medicine, resident graduates, and yet Harvard was 226 years old.

With some interruptions I studied at Harvard about two years, receiving
S. B. in 1865; the special examination was held for nearly two hours, conducted by three professors or instructors. I left, going immediately to an
academy at $1,000 a year, gradually increased to $1,300; later earning more
in the old University of Chicago and some private schools. In the summer
of 1870 I became one of a small faculty at the agricultural college, teaching
several things to a small number of students, holding the job forty years.

During the first decade I was one of the first four teachers in the country
to place a compound microscope in the hands of each student of a section
of a class; the other professors were Dr. Farlow, of Harvard, Professor
Harrington, of the University of Michigan, and C. E. Bessey, of Iowa Agricultural College.
In 1868, I attended the seventeenth meeting of the A. A. A. S. held in
Chicago where there were only two sections of the Society. There were only
three papers presented in botany, by Dr. Asa Gray, Thomas Meehan, of
Philadelphia, and Mr. Hilgard, a brother of Dr. E. W. Hilgard, at one time
Professor in the University.
Hasn't botany in America made some progress during the last 54 years?
W. J. BEAL, '59.