472 SCIENCE PROGRESS 



a physiological fact for the Physiological Society, a physical 

 fact for the Physical Society, etc. 



The second scientific method is that of the appointment of 

 scientific committees. If these committees really did their work 

 in a scientific manner, the results would be very valuable ; but 

 when the committee will only take the evidence of witnesses, 

 and will not examine essential facts, the only result is to set 

 back the subject for a number of years, and to ruin the career 

 of the man who has discovered the new facts. Twenty-five 

 years ago I pointed out in minute detail (i) how defective the 

 wool test for colour-blindness was. A special committee of the 

 Royal Society was appointed to decide on the truth of my 

 statements, but though it took my evidence it refused to examine 

 my cases, and decided in favour of the efficiency of the wool test. 

 A departmental committee appointed a few years ago to decide 

 the same question, took my evidence at length, but, as before, 

 would not let me demonstrate facts and cases to it, even 

 though I made a strong protest against this course. The 

 Board of Trade did not adopt my lantern (the official test of 

 the Navy), but constructed a lantern similar to one of my dis- 

 carded models ; and it will be interesting to note the results 

 of the examinations with this lantern compared with those of 

 a specially improved wool test, in which five test colours are 

 employed, two of which are similar to those recommended by 

 me twenty-five years ago if a wool test were to be employed. 

 It will be seen (2) that 52 per cent, of those finally rejected 

 passed this improved wool test, whilst not a single person other 

 than normal sighted were rejected by the wool test alone. It 

 should be noted that a present examiner, and member of the 

 committee, stated, in a book issued after the report, that the wool 

 test was sufficiently good ! This attitude, which is unfortunately 

 so common, especially at Cambridge, of expressing a strong 

 opinion whilst refusing to look at the facts, is not only unscien- 

 tific, but absolutely dishonest, and brings discredit not only on 

 the academic individual who evolves his science from his inner 

 consciousness, but upon the real scientific worker who does his 

 work with the most punctilious and conscientious accuracy. 



It is necessary to make these few preliminary statements, 

 because authority appears to paralyse the reasoning powers of 

 nearly every one, and it will be therefore necessary for the reader 

 to think for himself in perusing this article. 



