5 2 METEOROLOGY AND ETHICS [july 1899 



to a marked degree by meteorological conditions." Again we must demur 

 most emphatically to the quasi-physiological expression which the 

 author uses in summing up his results. His conception of "reserve 

 energy " is a reflex of a commercial environment, and appears to us 

 quite inapplicable to the real business of metabolism. It is an 

 unconscious 'materialism' — an attempt to give a false simplicity to the 

 facts. 



III. " The quality of the emotional state is plainly influenced." " It 

 is safe to say that high conditions of temperature and humidity, cloudy 

 and rainy days, and for many people high winds, are generally product- 

 ive of more or less negative emotional states ; while moderate and cool 

 temperatures, low humidities, mild winds, and clear days are usually 

 positive in their effects." But, as the author says, this thesis must be 

 defended by means of an analysis based solely upon introspection ; and 

 though he tries to connect it with his doctrine of " reserve energy " he 

 is not certain about it, and it is just as well. 



IV. " The reserve energy and the emotional state are both factors in 

 the determination of conduct." Here the author seeks to show that 

 his theory of " reserve energy " accounts for the discrepancies which are 

 apparent on the supposition that the emotional state is the only 

 factor. 



V. " Conduct, in the commonly accepted sense of the term, Death and 

 Intellectual and Physical Labour bear very different relations to reserve 

 energy." " As a conclusion, it would seemingly be safe to say that of 

 the activities (or cessation of activity) possible to human beings, some 

 are the result of excessive vitality, and others of deficient states;" and 

 that, generally speaking, " those misdemeanours which have been classed 

 under our study as those of conduct are the results of the former, while 

 death is an accompaniment of the latter." 



As it seems to us, the conclusion of the whole matter is that the 

 author has brought forward strong evidence to substantiate the thesis 

 that there is an indirect causal nexus between weather and conduct, 

 But we do not feel sure of anything else in his results, and particularly 

 we would respectfully suggest to him, that he has departed from the 

 scientific method by mingling with his inductive results a physiological 

 theory which is probably erroneous and certainly unnecessary. 



X. 



