acamik of scekces] SCIENTIFIC RELATIONS 251 



It may be noted in this geographical connection that although Gilbert did not often 

 employ certain terms that have come to be more or less generally used by physiographers 

 in the last 40 years, he nevertheless liked the "characterization of the stages of the topographic 

 cycle in terms of the cycle of human life," and when that terminology was assailed he took 

 occasion to defend it. 5 He held that the analogy on which the terminology is based is good 

 because it indicates a "close resemblance in some striking particulars, coupled with difference 

 in other respects"; that being precisely the relation between the topographic and the human 

 cycles. He added: 



In my judgment there are few groups of terms which serve better than does this group the purpose of 

 concisely expressing an idea. Its strength inheres, first, in the aptness and completeness of the analogy and, 

 second, in the perfect familiarity of the group of facts to which the unfamiliar facts are likened. . . . The 

 aptness and the familiarity make the terms permanently mnemonic, so that the use of any one oft hem brings 

 to mind not only the sequence, but relative position in the sequence. 



Gilbert attended the meeting of the Geological Society of America at Albuquerque in 

 December, 1907, and at Baltimore a year later; it was then that this society elected him for 

 the second time to its presidency, an honor bestowed on no other of its many members. Un- 

 happily his serious illness in the summer of 1909 made it impossible for him to preside at the 

 meeting in Boston and Cambridge the following winter; but he sent to the fellows there gath- 

 ered a message that was read at the annual dinner. After saying that he found some conso- 

 lation for his absence in the belief that the lusty vigor of the society "ensures the quick closing 

 of every gap, and that the cherished cause for which our Association stands is imperilled by 

 no default of an individual," he went on as if taking leave of old friends: 



As thought roams backward over the long series of our fruitful meetings, I realize as never before how the 

 growth of our science has been interwoven with the growth of our organization; how our individual efficiency 

 and our associate efficiency have each enhanced the other, and how the harmony and solidarity of our geological 

 body have been fostered by the personal contact of its members. As I dwell with ldnging on all the privileges 

 that this week are ours, I realize more than ever before how strong are the personal ties which bind me to you and how 

 large a measure of real comradeship has come to be implied by the formal title of Fellow. And so, Fellows 

 of the Geological Society, I send more than a cordial — I send an affectionate greeting. 



This message appears to have been Gilbert's last direct relation with any scientific 

 society; although he lived eight years longer, it was his farewell to many friends. That the 

 message should have been addressed to the Geological Society of America was most appro- 

 priate, for it was through his membership in that body about as much as through his position 

 on the national survey that he came into personal relation with his geological colleagues. 

 Mention has already been made of the great importance of the society in bringing American 

 geologists together in a friendly way and in promoting the progress of their science by personal 

 intercourse. It may be added that in contrast to many earlier gatherings of the geologists 

 in their section of the American Association, those of the Geological Society were relatively 

 peaceful, as if an era of comradeship and friendly discussion were replacing a former era of 

 rivalry and dissension. No one member contributed more to this beneficial change than 

 Gilbert. He seemed never to feel exasperation, much less to show it, however directly his 

 statements were traversed by those of another member. To be sure, his statements were 

 not often thus traversed, because when made they were as a rule seen to be so well based that 

 an opposing opinion could not find ground for its support; but it was by no means only for this 

 reason that his words and his manner were always pacific; it was quite as much because he 

 was by disposition utterly opposed to polemical disputes. Even the few who announced 

 a difference from his views could not let their differing detract from the admiration they felt 

 for him personally, because when he expressed his difference from them he was so fair, so 

 courteous, so impartial, that he elevated controversy into conference. If he found himself 

 by rare chance in the wrong, he promptly and frankfy avowed his mistake. If he found others 

 in the wrong, he made little of what he conceived to be their error, but emphasized instead 

 the objective reasons that led him to take another view than theirs. On one occasion, when 

 a competitive, not to say combative, member made report of certain conclusions based in 



• Style in scientific composition. Science, xxi, 1905, 28-29 

 20154°— 26 23 



