7 2 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



of the modern world into which science so largely enters, let him read 

 the report of the Eoyal Commission on the War in South Africa. There 

 he will see how the whole 'system' employed was, in Sir Henry 

 Brackenbury 's words applied to a part of it, 'unsuited to tl},e require- 

 ments of an Army which is maintained to enable lis to make war.* 

 Let him read also, in the address of the president of the Society 

 of Chemical Industry, what drastic steps had to be taken by Chambers 

 of Commerce and 'a quarter of a million of working men' to get the 

 Patent Law Amendment Act into proper shape, in spite of all the 

 advisers and officials of the Board of Trade. Very few people realize 

 the immense number of scientific problems the solution of which is 

 required for the state service. The nation itself is a gigantic work- 

 shop, and the more our rulers and legislators, administrators and 

 executive officers possess the scientific spirit, the more the rule of 

 thumb is replaced in the state service by scientific methods, the more 

 able shall we be, thus armed at all points, to compete successfully with 

 other countries along all lines of national as well as of commercial 

 activity. 



It is obvious that the power of a nation for war, in men and arms 

 and ships, is one thing; its power in the peace struggles to which I 

 have referred is another; in the latter, the source and standard of 

 national efficiency are entirely changed. To meet war conditions, there 

 must be equality or superiority in battleships and army corps. To meet 

 the new peace conditions there must be equality or superiority in 

 universities, scientific organizations and everything which conduces to 

 greater brain-power. 



The present condition of the nation, so far as its industries are 

 concerned, is as well known, not only to the Prime Minister, but to 

 other political leaders in and out of the Cabinet, as it is to you and 

 to me. Let me refer to two speeches delivered by Lord Eosebery and 

 Mr. Chamberlain on two successive days in January, 1901 : 



Lord Eosebery spoke as follows : 



, . . The war I regard with apprehension is the war of trade which is 

 unmistakably upon us. . . . When I look round me I cannot blind my eyes 

 to the fact that so far as we can predict anything of the twentieth century on 

 which we have now entered, it is that it will be one of acutest international 

 conflict in point of trade. We were the first nation of the modern world to 

 discover that trade was an absolute necessity. For that we were nicknamed 

 a nation of shopkeepers; but now every nation wishes to be a nation of shop- 

 keepers, too, and I am bound to say that when we look at the character of some 

 of these nations, and when we look at the intelligence of their preparations, 

 we may well feel that it behooves us not to fear, but to gird up our loins in prep- 

 aration for what is before us. 



Mr. Chamberlain's views were stated in the following words : 



I do not think it is necessary for me to say anything as to the urgency 

 and necessity of scientific training. ... It is not too much to say that the 



