362 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM 1892. 



VIII. THE CLAIMS OF GEOLOGICAL SCIENCE UPON INVESTIGATORS, 



MUSEUMS, ETC. 



With reference to the ordinary pursuits; of life it can hardly be said 

 that, aside from a natural demand for respectable emulation, one's 

 occupation has any claims upon him other than those which are either 

 conventionally or legally imposed by society upon every one of its 

 members. The geological investigator, however, is not only amenable 

 to all such claims but to others of a different nature which, although 

 not enforceable by legal, and unfortunately not yet by conventional, 

 penalties are not less imperative in their character. 



These claims upon the investigator will be presented in the following 

 paragraphs, but it is well to remark here that they are by no means an 

 abridgement of his rights as an individual, because he has no rights 

 with relation to science which the latter does not confer. It is true 

 that the legal right of personal ownership of scientific material and 

 the abstract right of independent investigation can not be questioned 

 from the standpoint of the ordinary affairs of life, but it is my purpose 

 to show that the individual investigator owes an allegiance to science 

 which demands at least a modification of the privilege of asserting 

 those rights. That is, I propose to show that because the general 

 advancement of geological science must be accomplished and its integ- 

 rity maintained by the cooperation of a multitude of workers in the 

 various branches of investigation, its claims are superior to those of 

 the individual, and that he can not exclusively assert the rights referred 

 to without material disadvantage to science. Indeed, he can not do so 

 without lessening, and to some extent destroying, the value of his own 

 labors. 



Much might be said in favor of the demands which may be made in 

 the name of science upon the individual on the ground of justice and 

 of moral and social ethics, but I shall omit all considerations of this kind 

 and refer only to those claims which are supported by the urgent neces- 

 sities of science itself. Claims of the kind referred to might be made 

 in favor of all the various divisions of science, but I shall on the pres- 

 ent occasion confine my discussions to those which pertain to biological 

 geology, including both its structural and systematic branches. With 

 reference to the manner in which the subject of this essay is pre- 

 sented it is proper to say that the homilitic form has not been adopted 

 merely from personal preference, but because I believe it to be in the 

 present case a proper and effective, if an indirect, method of calling 

 attention to prevalent errors, and of suggesting necessary improve 

 ments in certain prevalent methods. 



These claims of science will be considered not only with reference to 

 the individual investigator, but to associations, museums, and geolog- 



