35 



I may premise by saying that the State as a rule can not deal in intellectual 

 futures. It can not or should not make appropriations for investigations to run 

 through long series of years, the ultimate outcome of which is merely the solution 

 of some scientific problem. To the scientist such problems are of the profound- 

 est interest, their solution seems to him of alnu)st paramount importance, and yet 

 a moment's reflection will serve to show that the State can not properly provide 

 for such work. The State has to deal, not with the general problems of science, 

 save as they are applicable to immediate needs, but with the welfare of her citi- 

 zens. Welfare being a term under present conditions, which seems to be largely 

 material in its interpretation, incidentally intellectual, remotely moral. 



If I am right in this view, it follows that the first duty of science to the State 

 is the development and protection of her material resources. This may appear, at first, 

 a lowering of the high ideals many of us hold, and yet as we increase the resources 

 of our commonwealth, we manifestly increase the possibility of the attainment of 

 our high ideals. "Untoward circumstances" has blighted many a scientific as- 

 piration. An increase in material prosperity is the shortest cut to an increase in 

 the intellectual activity and development of the State. As intellectual activity is 

 increased, the constituency appreciating the value of scientific work increases, 

 opportunities broaden and achievement is possible. I am inclined to think that 

 the duty to increase and conserve the material resources of the State may be found 

 to be the all inclusive duty of science, since if thoroughly done, all other desired 

 conditions will naturally follow. To become concrete. For a long series of years 

 the State has maintained a geological survey. I believe that in spite of the num- 

 erous criticisms that can justly be made upon the published reports, no wiser or 

 more productive expenditure of public moneys has been made. If all conditions 

 are considered, limitations of opportunity, uncertain and meagre appropriations, 

 illogical selection of the official chief by popular vote, control over the extent and 

 character of the reports by committees and the sundry other stumbling blocks in 

 the way of the highest efficiency, the results are surprisingly good. As individ- 

 uals and as an association, I believe we have failed in our duty to the State as 

 regards these publications. It goes without saying that the work of the State 

 Geologist would have been made infinitely simpler, that his reports would have 

 had a higher value if he had received during the past ten years the hearty indi- 

 vidual and associate co-operation of this Academy. We have, in a degree, lost 

 an opportunity to make science and the scientist a factor in the material advance 

 of the State. 



