FRANCIS G ALTON 189 



and remain, but tbe worker is forgotten. Still a third class " have shown 

 their original powers by little more than a continuous flow of helpful 

 suggestions and criticisms, which were individually of too little im- 

 portance to be remembered in the history of science, but which in their 

 aggregate, formed a notable aid towards progress." Notwithstanding 

 all of the important fields in which his name should take honorable 

 place, a writer in Nature, and one who is evidently qualified to write 

 of the more personal side of Mr. Galton's life, has told us that his 

 own strongest impetus to science was probably this continuous flow of 

 helpful suggestions and criticisms, this personal inspiration, which he 

 exercised over those with whom he came in contact. 



Probably this is true. If one looks for the thing which was next 

 in importance to the personal influence which he exerted, it will not be 

 found in recorded observations but in scientific method. Were his 

 share in the advancement of science to be measured by the quantity of 

 bricks and mortar that we call concrete facts which he made available 

 for others, his place would be an honorable one. But the question which 

 seemed always uppermost in his mind was, how can the essential facts 

 concerning this phenomenon be most easily and accurately obtained 

 and interpreted? Everything he came in contact with presented a 

 problem of method. He touched many fields, and so the problems in 

 method which he set himself were numerous. The " Art of Travel," 

 the standardization of instruments, the installation of self-recording 

 meteorological batteries, the charting of meteorological data, the 

 identification of criminals by finger prints, composite photography, 

 methods and instruments for anthropometry, photographic records of 

 pedigree stock, and finally the correlation coefficient, all attest his in- 

 ventive genius and his eagerness to attain greater precision in every 

 problem Avhich he touched. 



In the case of both Darwin and Galton the greatness of the man 

 has stood in the way of his recognition. Sorting the work of either of 

 them into the compartments of the specialty cabinet and comparing 

 it there with that of others who have devoted themselves to one sub- 

 ject only, it seems meager in volume. Most men are interested in the 

 contents of but one pigeon hole, or are incapable of considering more 

 than a single compartment at a time. If we look under geography or 

 geology, botany or zoology, anthropology, psychology or social science, 

 we find the impress of Darwin and Galton there. But judged as special- 

 ists merely there may be some misgivings as to the claim to emi- 

 nence of either of these grandsons of Erasmus Darwin. But now and 

 then a man appears who chafes at the limits of a single cell, who feels 

 that there should be additional compartments, or that partitions be- 

 tween established divisions should be broken and become nominal 

 merely. He may even insist that the point of view or the method of 

 research of all the specialists requires modification. Such a man may 



