442 ASTROPHYSICS 



much matter if all the others are destroyed. Whence we may deduce 

 two conclusions: first, that it is eminently desirable that these 

 beautiful pictures should be measured and reduced as soon as possible; 

 secondly, that we must consider future plans of campaign very care- 

 fully if we are to avoid waste of work and discouragement of workers. 

 It is tolerably easy to reach the first precise conclusion; I wish it were 

 easier to arrive at something more definite in regard to the second. 

 It seems clear that we may expect some readjustment of the relations 

 between the better-equipped observatories and those less fortunate, 

 but it is not at all clear what direction that readjustment should 

 take. One possibility is indicated by the instance before us: the 

 discussion of the Lick photographs was not conducted at the Lick 

 Observatory, but at Cambridge; the price paid for the fine climate of 

 Mount Hamilton is the accumulation of work beyond the powers of 

 the staff to deal with, and the new divison of labor may be, for the 

 observatories with fine climates and equipment to take the photo- 

 graphs, and astronomers elsewhere to measure and discuss them. 

 Professor Kapteyn has set us a noble and well-known example in 

 this direction, and in view of the pressing need for a study of many 

 photographs already taken, it is to be hoped that his example will 

 be followed, especially in cases similar to his own, where no observa- 

 tory is in existence. If in such cases the investigator will set up a 

 measuring-machine instead of a telescope, he will deserve the grati- 

 tude of the astronomical world. 



But the case is not so clear when a telescope is already in existence. 

 Mr. Hinks had a fine telescope at Cambridge, and it required some 

 self-denial on his part to give up observing for a time in order to dis- 

 cuss the Lick photographs and others. If the accumulations already 

 made, and others certain to be made in the future, are to be dealt 

 with, this kind of self-denial must certainly be exercised, but it does 

 not seem quite clear that it should always fall to the lot of those with 

 a modest equipment. Considerations of strict economy might suggest 

 this view, but there is a human side to the argument which is not 

 unimportant. The danger that the minor observatories should feel 

 their work unnecessary is even graver than the similar possibility 

 in the case of amateurs already mentioned, and calls for prompt 

 attention from astronomers generally, if it is to be averted. It is the 

 more serious because of another set of considerations of a quite dif- 

 ferent kind, viz., the funds available for research show a rather alarm- 

 ing tendency to accumulate in the hands of a few large observato- 

 ries, leaving many astronomers who could do useful work without the 

 means of doing it. A conspicuous example is afforded by the present 

 state of the work for the Astrographic Chart initiated in Paris seven- 

 teen years ago. On the one hand, a few of the large observatories 

 have easily acquired funds not only for taking and measuring the 



