4(»(; 



THE AMERICAN MUSEUM JOURNAL 



oartli-seienee as a whole, and the proper 

 training of investigators will come 

 about promptly and with no great difh- 

 culty. 



The relation of floras and faunas to 

 latitude, and to elevation above sea 

 level on land and depth below it in the 

 ocean, presents as fundamental prob- 

 lems to biology as stratification and the 

 topographic character of a region pre- 

 sent to geology, and it is as absurd to 

 think of solving the one class of prob- 

 lems as the other by laboratory experi- 

 ment, prosecuted without any serious 

 study of the phenomena themselves. 

 Geologists would not be recognized as 

 geologists at all if they had received 

 no other than laboratory training, 

 while training in the laboratory is held 

 to be all that botanists and zoologists 

 need. . . . 



Let the mohiei's of puljlic opinion in 

 the chief subjects usually called hu- 

 manistic — history, sociology, econom- 

 ics, politics, ethics, religion, once come 

 to see how fundamentally soundness of 

 view and healthfulness of life in all 

 these domains are dej)en(lcnt u])on cor- 

 rect elementary information al)out na- 

 ture, and innumerable students of edu- 

 cational problems, teachers, and public- 

 spirited and philanthropic jiersons will 

 concentrate their thought and inge- 

 nuity upon surmounting the practical 



diiliculties in the way of securing the 

 contact with nature which is indispen- 

 sable to such information and attitude. 

 The only specific expression as to 

 procedure which I now make is such 

 as concerns the part which it seems to 

 me institutions like this ought to play 

 in the educational reformation de- 

 manded by the times. The greatly ex- 

 tended elementary education in living 

 nature which it is to be hoped the fu- 

 ture will see, will l)e accomplished 

 through a judicious working together 

 of parents, schools, botanical and zo- 

 ological gardens, city parks, aquaria, 

 and particularly endowed foundations, 

 which, like this California Academy of 

 Sciences, combine researches on the 

 natural history aspects of biology with 

 ])ublic museums. Underpinned by a 

 clear ])erception on the part of a much 

 larger proportion of scientific men 

 themseh'es, of educators, and of lead- 

 ers of opinion as to what it all means, 

 such educational undertakings as those 

 by the American ]\Iuseum of Natural 

 History in Xew York City^ and the 

 Field Museum of Natural History in 

 Chicago have possibilities for good that 

 are simply incalculable — and it is with 

 the utmost satisfaction that I witness 

 the splendid beginning in the same di- 

 rection being made for San Francisco 

 bv the California Academv of Sciences. 



1 In connection with this paper by Dr. Ritter, we would recall that the American Museum has for 

 many years conducted field expeditions on a large scale in this country and other countries, and bases 

 the greater part of its laboratory researches directly upon its field researches. Also large educational 

 work in connection with the secondary and high schools of New York City was begun by the American 

 Museum a considerable number of years ago. This work has been further organized and expanded under 

 the personal administration of Mr. George H. Slierwood into a most efficient system of lectures and class 

 instruction at the Museum, and classroom study in the schools on loaned sets of birds and many other 

 kinds of specimens. In addition, the Museum has had the policy of constructing permanent exhibits, 

 like the bird and reptile groups, which show animals in their home environment, setting forth their life 

 history, and their relations to food and enemies as in nature. Thus, for the schools of the congested 

 parts of New York City, the American Museum has come to serve as both "laboratory" and "field." 

 Institutions of this type have a great work before them for the future, in that they stand peculiarly and 

 particularly as interpreters between the scientific workers of the country and the people. 



That field work has not been always highly rated in the past is partly explained by the fact that 

 biology is just coming out of tlie period when laboratory work was so exalted by its merit as a method 

 that any other method was undervalued by contrast. This sort of thing is always to be expected because 

 of the method of development of science. Growth of biological science, for instance, from the beginning 

 through the centuries, has come about by the exploration step by step of a vast unknown province of 

 knowledge. At any given moment in its history we should be certain to find that scientists are putting 

 the empliasis unduly on some partial phase of the work or some temporary method. Progress, however, 

 comes only by specialization: because of the briefness of any man's life, if he is to accomplish anything 

 worth bequeathing to science, he must specialize, and leave to the men in the generations after him the 

 task of fitting his contribution into its place in the developing body of knowledge. It is by these side 

 branches of profoundly serious, accurate, although not fully comprehensive investigation that the main 

 line of advance is assured. 



The point of Dr. Ritter's paper cannot be emphasized too often or too strongly, — that for the sake 

 of knowledge, training, and liberalizing influence, increased amounts of field work should be combined 

 with the classroom and laboratory work in all elementary courses for the studv of plant and animal 

 life.— The Editok. 



