204 



THE OOLOGIST. 



is safe iu doiug the work legitimately 

 belouging to his profession. 



The Geologist, Botanist, Ornitholo- 

 gist,Ichthyologist,or Mammalogist finds 

 himself confronted ou every hand by 

 la.vs which, were a complaint made, 

 would subject him to severe penalties. 

 The Icthj-ologist makes himself a law- 

 breaker if he preserves a specimen of a 

 fish. The law distinctl}' says that ncj 

 minnows or small fish fry shall be taken 

 for any purpose except for bait, and 

 makes the possession of a fish scale, fish 

 tail, or a fish's ^n, prima facia evidence 

 of a violation of law. Woe unto the 

 Biologist who attempts to make any in- 

 vestigations. 



The Ornithologist onl^' is recognized 

 and he only is insulted and treated as a 

 Vandal. He must get a special permit 

 for each month to take two of each spe- 

 cies in one county only and onl}' of such 

 species as are named in his application. 

 A fine of $5 is imposed for every bird's 

 egg collected, and no permits issued. 



A Botanist may be arrested and pun- 

 ished for any specimen of plant he ma}' 

 dig up. The Geologist for any speci- 

 men he raaj' collect. 



That there should be some laws pro- 

 tecting birds, fish, game, etc , is plainly 

 proper, but the scientist is not the van- 

 dal that calls for these laws. It is the 

 professional sport, the small boy, the 

 vandal who kills the small birds to ob- 

 tain their skins to ornament some so- 

 called lady's head, that need to be reg- 

 lilated. Some scientists may be wan- 

 tonly destructive, what vocation has no 

 black sheep V these should also be re- 

 strained. But it is an outrage, and in- 

 sult, that no other vocation would bear 

 to be treated as the Michigan statue 

 books treat us. 



Shall we as scienti.sts continue to 

 tamelj' submit to such ti'eatmentv Is it 

 not evident that we must combine foi- 

 inutual protection? And, what voca- 

 tion is not benefited, enlightened, and 

 advanced by an organization, and con- 



sequent meetings? Someone asks, why 

 is a general organization desirable? 

 For the reason there is really but one 

 great broad field of science comprising 

 to be sure of several departments, each 

 department having its own special 

 C(n-ps of workers, and yet all these de- 

 partments are mutually related and 

 workers iu each department have mu- 

 tual interests with those of every othei* 

 department. 



Besides there are generalists among- 

 scientists, Linneus, Agassiz, Darwin, 

 Baird, et al, were generalists, notably 

 Linneus, who left his imprint upoi^ 

 eveiy department of Botany and Zoolo-. 

 og3% one cannot glance over works in 

 these branches without profound aston- 

 ishment at the vast amount of work ae- 

 complishhd by thess workers, as evi-. 

 denced by the vast numbers of species 

 that he named in both the animal and 

 vegetable kingdoms. Darwin workec^ 

 in the same fields, Agassiz and Baird 

 left their imprint upon all branches of 

 Zoology. 



No worker in any branch of the vast 

 field of science can proceed far without 

 finding golden chains binding all bran- 

 ches of science together. Then why not 

 a general organization for mutual pro- 

 tection, improvement, and advance- 

 ment. 



Four classes of labors sliould be rev 

 cognized in such an organization, — the. 

 pi'ofessional, the amateur, the student, 

 and the friend of science. Each should 

 be duly noticed and encouraged. Suit- 

 able fields for work may be found for 

 each of these classes, bigotrj' and intoK 

 erance should be frowned upon. 



There should be national, state and 

 local organizations, and national, state 

 and local meetings. Each organization 

 should own and control a museum and 

 library. Scientific expeditions should 

 l)e fitted out. Annual encampments in 

 localities specially fitted for field work 

 and others practical work, should not 

 Ijc neglected. 



