﻿98 
  JOURNAL 
  OF 
  THS 
  WASHINGTON 
  ACADEMY 
  OF 
  SCIENCES 
  VOL. 
  12, 
  NO. 
  4 
  

  

  follow 
  that 
  all 
  other 
  science 
  is 
  impractical, 
  a 
  conclusion 
  that 
  will 
  

   hardly 
  satisfy 
  its 
  devotees. 
  In 
  making 
  such 
  a 
  distinction 
  it 
  should 
  

   be 
  remembered 
  that 
  there 
  is 
  often 
  a 
  quick 
  transfer 
  of 
  the 
  results 
  of 
  

   pure 
  science 
  to 
  the 
  category 
  of 
  applied 
  science. 
  A 
  scientific 
  product 
  

   so 
  "pure" 
  that 
  it 
  will 
  stand 
  the 
  most 
  searching 
  "tubercular 
  test" 
  

   may 
  be 
  snatched 
  for 
  "applied 
  science" 
  before 
  it 
  has 
  been 
  fairly 
  de- 
  

   livered 
  at 
  the 
  doorstep 
  of 
  the 
  consumer. 
  If 
  the 
  exact 
  meaning 
  of 
  the 
  

   words 
  is 
  retained, 
  applied 
  science, 
  or, 
  indeed, 
  we 
  should 
  say 
  science 
  

   applied 
  to 
  industry, 
  must 
  be 
  restricted 
  to 
  the 
  work 
  of 
  the 
  technician 
  

   and 
  inventor 
  who 
  uses 
  a 
  scientific 
  principle 
  for 
  some 
  practical 
  purpose. 
  

   The 
  principle 
  may 
  be 
  the 
  result 
  of 
  an 
  inquiry 
  either 
  by 
  an 
  investigator 
  

   whose 
  only 
  motive 
  was 
  to 
  determine 
  the 
  law 
  itself 
  or 
  by 
  one 
  who 
  fore- 
  

   saw 
  its 
  possible 
  practical 
  use. 
  The 
  condition 
  remains 
  the 
  same 
  

   whether 
  it 
  is 
  the 
  application 
  of 
  the 
  simpler 
  laws 
  of 
  mechanics 
  in 
  the 
  

   making 
  of 
  the 
  formerly 
  very 
  useful 
  device 
  called 
  a 
  beer 
  stopper 
  or 
  the 
  

   application 
  of 
  the 
  laws 
  of 
  physics 
  in 
  the 
  building 
  of 
  a 
  tide-predicting 
  

   machine. 
  

  

  The 
  difficulty 
  of 
  accurately 
  defining 
  pure 
  science 
  as 
  distinct 
  from 
  

   applied 
  science 
  leads 
  to 
  the 
  suspicion 
  that 
  there 
  is 
  really 
  no 
  basal 
  

   difference 
  between 
  the 
  two. 
  No 
  one 
  can 
  doubt 
  the 
  "purity" 
  of 
  in- 
  

   quiries 
  into 
  the 
  laws 
  of 
  terrestrial 
  magnetism, 
  yet 
  their 
  practical 
  value 
  

   to 
  the 
  surveyor 
  and 
  the 
  navigator 
  cannot 
  be 
  questioned. 
  A 
  geologic 
  

   map 
  is 
  clearly 
  a 
  contribution 
  to 
  pure 
  science, 
  yet 
  who 
  can 
  foresee 
  to 
  

   what 
  base 
  use 
  it 
  may 
  be 
  put 
  by 
  the 
  prospector? 
  The 
  results 
  of 
  any 
  

   given 
  research 
  may 
  be 
  classified 
  as 
  to 
  the 
  validity 
  of 
  the 
  conclusions, 
  

   as 
  to 
  the 
  value 
  of 
  the 
  results 
  to 
  science, 
  as 
  to 
  the 
  ability 
  of 
  the 
  in- 
  

   vestigator, 
  and 
  as 
  to 
  the 
  thoroughness 
  of 
  the 
  methods 
  employed; 
  

   but 
  the 
  scientist's 
  motive 
  for 
  the 
  research 
  affords 
  no 
  logical 
  basis 
  for 
  

   assigning 
  it 
  either 
  to 
  pure 
  or 
  to 
  applied 
  science. 
  

  

  Illogical 
  as 
  these 
  terms 
  may 
  be, 
  however, 
  a 
  lack 
  of 
  originality 
  to 
  

   invent 
  new 
  ones 
  forces 
  me 
  to 
  use 
  them. 
  In 
  the 
  commonly 
  accepted 
  

   phraseology, 
  then, 
  the 
  term 
  pure 
  science 
  includes 
  nearly 
  all 
  university 
  

   research 
  and 
  that 
  of 
  many 
  endowed 
  scientific 
  institutions, 
  and 
  the 
  

   term 
  applied 
  science 
  includes 
  researches 
  that 
  are 
  avowedly 
  devoted 
  to 
  

   industry 
  supported 
  by 
  private 
  funds, 
  and 
  also 
  those 
  of 
  the 
  great 
  

   medical 
  research 
  institutions. 
  The 
  Federal 
  scientific 
  service 
  is, 
  how- 
  

   ever, 
  the 
  great 
  stronghold 
  of 
  applied 
  science, 
  though 
  it 
  includes 
  some 
  

   researches, 
  like 
  those 
  of 
  the 
  Smithsonian 
  Institution, 
  that 
  must 
  be 
  

   classed 
  as 
  pure 
  science. 
  

  

  Kelvin 
  has 
  said 
  that 
  "no 
  great 
  law 
  in 
  natural 
  philosophy 
  has 
  been 
  

  

  