6 EXPERIMENT STATION RECORD. 



investigation in which the qualities supplied by the individual con- 

 stitute a large element in success. We recognize effective original 

 research as essentially an individual product. But in this field also, 

 there is probably opportunity at times for a coordination or division 

 of effort which would conserve time and employ the various par- 

 ticipants to the best advantage, so that the work of each would be 

 productive and would avoid unprofitable duplication. 



In general science, men of special originality and genius have 

 developed new lines of thought or made epoch-making discoveries in 

 moments of inspiration or by close, concentrated study. Similarily 

 in agricultural investigation, the product of certain men stands out 

 in a way that has stamped them as leaders of thought. There are 

 others apparently of less originality but of painstaking industry 

 whose efforts have contributed to the advancement of research by 

 exact observations and careful records, following along lines sug- 

 gested by the theories of others. Their work supplements and con- 

 firms or tests the generalizations or theories whidi have been put 

 forward, and it extends the basis for exact knowledge or its applica- 

 tion. Their most useful work is often in this field, at least until 

 they have developed a theory or point of attack which justifies em- 

 barking on a new and independent line of investigation. 



If some feasible means could be provided for more effective coor- 

 dination in research, or some way by which through mutual agree- 

 ment certain phases of a subject could be divided and portions under- 

 taken by groups of inve>;tigators working under a common under- 

 standing, we should make progress more rapidly, for the promise 

 of well rounded and connected investigation would Ikj increased. 

 There would be less likelihood of working at cross-purposes, or of 

 efforts which in the end prove ineffective and largely negative. 



A recent writer in Natvrtu discussing the desiraltility of coopera- 

 tion in research, comments on the disconnected character of the pub- 

 lished accounts of scientific work. He says : " The proceedings of our 

 learned societies, from the Royal Society downward, and of the 

 technical institutions as well, are a record of an ever-increasing num- 

 ber of papers on subjects for the time being attracting attention, but 

 which are quite detached in their manner of dealing with it. . . . 

 Certain discoveries and papers stand out as landmarks, and epoch- 

 making. On the other hand, it is impossible to avoid asking the 

 question whether nuuh of the work of those who may perhajis l>e 

 described as the privates and officers of lower rank in the scientific 

 army could not have been made to yield more valuable results if it 

 had been better coordinated and directed." 



The article suggests that the learned societies might contribute to 

 the efficiency of investigation by helping to direct individual workers 

 to lines of investigation converging in certain useful directions or 



