494 Matlwws Plan for American Biological Society [April 



We are working definitely towards a closer affiliation of the biolog- 

 ical societies as witnessed by the arrangements for the meeting next 

 winter in Philadelphia when all of the societies will be together except 

 the Bacteriologists and Botanists. This is distinct progress and it 

 would seem to me best to give the present arrangements a longer trial 

 before considering a plan so complicated as that proposed by Dr. 

 Mathews. I am most heartily in favor of a close affiliation of the bio- 

 logical societies but believe that we shall make our best progress along 

 the present lines of development. 



Martin H. Fischer, Univ. of Cincinnati. In answer to your letter 

 relative to the Organization of an Amer. Biolog. Soc'y permit me to 

 say that I think the plan as suggested in Dr. Mathews' article is not 

 alone a necessary one, but a feasible and good one. I hope that you 

 will be successful in bringing about such needed reform. 



G. W. Fitz, Peconic, Suffolk Co., N. Y. I am heartily in favor of 

 the Mathews plan of Cooperation to reduce the cost of the various 

 Journals to a more reasonable basis. 



R. A. GoRTNER, Station for Experimental Evolution, Cold Spring 

 Harbor, L. I. I am heartily in favor of the Mathews plan for the 

 amalgamation of the existing biological societies into one great Organi- 

 zation. Any means by which greater Cooperation can be obtained is to 

 be approved. The Biolog. Abstract Jour. would be a most welcome 

 addition to our library, and would supply a need that I have often feit. 

 Personally I should prefer to see the membership fee $io or $12 and 

 to receive the Abstract Jour. and say two others, with the privilege of 

 securing more Journals by a graduated membership fee. 



Chas. W. Greene, Univ. of Mo. I have read over again Dr. 

 Mathews' Suggestion for a larger Biolog. Soc'y. Without entering into 

 all the details I must say that the relations to Journal publications espe- 

 cially appeal to me. American biologists are paying too dearly for 

 their scientific publications. Any scheme such as this that will largely 

 increase the subscription lists with the corresponding decrease in cost 

 per volume is to be commended. In three of the leading biological 

 societies to which I belong I pay for membership and Journals, by the 

 present plan, from $23.00 to $28.00 per year, receiving four volumes. 

 The Journals do not allow plates outside of the cheaper process type. 

 Lithography is out of the question and even color process plates must 

 be paid for extra. There is also unnecessary duplication in the admin- 

 istrative expense of the societies. I am heartily in favor of any plan 



