THE POLLUTION OF THE SEA 35 



for the distinction of species from species, or the question of 

 the validity of the concept of species among bacteria, can fail 

 to see that the proper thing to do was not to discard the bacterio- 

 logical method but to take steps to amplify and perfect it for 

 the particular purpose in view. Here we have an instance (and 

 it is of particular interest at the present time, for these Regula- 

 tions must have been drafted during the period of the war) of a 

 Government Department deliberately counselling the disuse of 

 a scientific method. That the method may be a faulty one does 

 not justify the action, for we can be very sure that this faultiness 

 is simply the result of insufficient scientific research. What 

 the Board should have done, when the Report of the Sewage 

 Commission had been fully considered, was to take immediate 

 and ample measures to institute well-planned investigations. 

 Let us note, in conclusion, that the whole history of the 

 depreciation of the shellfish industry which has followed upon 

 the interim Report, in 1904, of the Sewage Commission is not 

 only an instance of the failure of administrative machinery 

 inadequately based upon scientific research, but it is also the 

 history of the failure of the fishery and public health administra- 

 tions to develop what are in reality enormously valuable na- 

 tional resources. I hasten to add that this failure is not so 

 much that of the fishery administrations themselves as that of 

 the inadequate way in which these authorities were provided 

 for by the Treasury, and I speak, of course, of the years pre- 

 ceding the war. The local fishery committees are, in theory, 

 empowered to undertake schemes of shellfish development 

 provided that their programmes receive the sanction of the 

 Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, a sanction which has 

 always been given in a very sympathetic manner. I say " in 

 theory " because it is found that adequate schemes of develop- 

 ment are impracticable for financial reasons. The Board itself 

 can also undertake such schemes of development, and even now 

 two such promising undertakings are in progress. Further, 

 both the Board and the local committees have undertaken 

 programmes of scientific investigation having for their object 

 the further development of the shell-fisheries. This investiga- 

 tion — which, one must insist upon, is absolutely essential — is, 

 of course, altogether inadequately planned. There the matter 

 remains, and since no particular public authority can be singled 

 put for blame, one must conclude that the failure to make the 



