430 



NA TURE 



{March 15, 1877 



LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 



[T/ie Editor docs not hold himself responsible for opinions expressed 

 by his correspondents. Neither can he undertake to return, 

 or to correspond v/ith the writers of, rejected manuscripts. 

 No notice is taken of anonymous communications.'] 



Science at Oxford 



The anonymous " Oxford Man " who so effectively reformed 

 his Alma Mater on paper in the last number of Nature can 

 hardly be complimented on his successful and unfilial misrepre- 

 sentations. It is not true that "of all the 360 fellowships in the 

 various colleges only five are held by persons (exclusive of pro- 

 fessors) who have been elected to them in consideration of their 

 attainments in physical science." At the present moment no 

 less than six fellowships are being held by biologiits, viz., at 

 Exeter, two j at Magdalen, two ; at Pembroke, one ; and at 

 Ch. Ch., one; and two fellowships at Merton, one at Brasenose, 

 one at C. C. C., and two at Ch. Ch., are tenable for physics or 

 chemistry solely. It is true that one Merton fellowship and the 

 one at Corpus is at the moment vacant, but this does not affect 

 the question. Thus there are twelve instead of five fellowships 

 in the hands of natural science honour men, and considering the 

 few who graduate in the science school as compared with the 

 vast crowds who in the aggregate go out in other schools, the 

 number is by no means despicable. There is, moreover, the 

 equivalent of a fellowship held by the Millard Lecturer in 

 physics, who receives from Trinity an annual grant of 200/. 

 This list of prizes takes no account ol those fellowships in which 

 * * the application of mathematics to physics has been allowed 

 to count in establishing a students' claim to such fellowship." 



It is difficult to make out why the statistics of 1875 should 

 have been selected by " an Oxford Man," to whom one would 

 imagine the calendar for 1877 should be by no means inaccessible, 

 and the conclusions to which consideration of these statistics has 

 led him irresistibly suggest to those who know Oxford as it is, 

 that " an Oxford Man's" survey is retrospective. 



That the public schools pay so little heed to physical science is 

 matter for regret, which is however tempered by the assurance 

 that a change has been inaugurated in places, and the conviction 

 grows daily stronger that the claims of natural truth are forcing 

 a recognition in these centres of preliminary culture. At Eton, 

 at Rugby, and at Clifton, science is no longer a bye-word and a 

 play, but with masters to teach and willing boys to learn, biology 

 and physics and chemistry are fast becoming realities where, 

 not very long ago, they were but phantom names. 



It is folly to hint of "introducing any branch of physical 

 science into any one of the compulsory examinations," Such a 

 course would effectually crush the growing taste for natural 

 knowledge ; it is only by leaving it an optional or alternative sub- 

 ject that the present prejudice against the study of science can 

 be satisfactorily subdued. 



Only ignorance of the Oxford of to-day could have led to the 

 expression " even the heads of houses are with few exceptions 

 men who have been schoolmasters, or who hope to be so." The 

 Master of University, and the Dean of Christ Church can alone 

 claim to have served in the capacity which has been asserted of 

 the majority. The conclusion of the sentence quoted is 

 ridiculous when applied to the senior members of the collegiate 

 bodies. 



The concluding paragraph of " an Oxford Man's " article is 

 perhaps most glaringly indicative of sublime ignorance of the 

 Oxford of to-day. Those whose interest, it is assumed, " it is to 

 suppress a class of studies of which they are themselves ignorant," 

 include many names honoured even in metropolitan centres of 

 scientific culture ; and it would better become all " Oxford 

 men " who, in absentia, are prone to think of the University as 

 they knew it, to assure themselves that things have remained in 

 statu quo, than to censure in ignorance that a little careful 

 inquiry would completely dispel. Charles H. Wade 



Magd. Coll., Oxford, March 12 



Just Intonation 



Other occupations have prevented my replying sooner to Col. 

 A. R. Clarke's amusing charge (vol. xv. p. 353), that it is I 

 (instead of he himself) who " confound vibration numbers with 

 *.^^l, ^^'^l^^-" Three examples are included in his first letter : 



The vibration numbers of the diatonic scale being repre- 

 sented by — 



I 9 5 4 3 5 15 2 " 

 843238 



The figures are correct in this instance, but instead of being 

 " vibration numbers," they represent only the ratios of vibration. 



Then follows : "if we build the scale upon the dominant-?, the 



2 

 vibration numbers will be — 



I 9 5 45 3 27 IS 

 8 4 32 .' 2 16 8 



and "if we built upon the sub-dominant -, the vibration num- 



3 

 bers will be — 



I ^° 5 

 9 4 



2. 



4 3 5 16 

 — > > -> > 

 3239 



Such -ratios as these could not pass unchallenged in Nature, 

 therefore I drew the anonymous writer's attention to the second 

 and third scales, only pointing to the first intervals in each, 

 and as "oversights." It was reasonable to expect that be 

 would submit the scales to some competent musical friend, 

 who would correct them throughout. Instead of doing so, 

 the Colonel announced himself, and had the courage to 

 write, "the errors and oversights with which Mr. Chappell 

 charges me are imaginary." Under the plea of "making 

 the matter clearer," he changed the ratios (January i8j, 

 but still he could not set them right. Col. Clarke's third 

 letter convinces me that he does not permit his figures to 

 be called in question by any person. Perhaps, then, one 

 illustration of the Colonel's system of making, or of transferring, 



ratios may interest the reader. I select his '^^, because its source 



32 

 may perhaps be pointed out. Mr, Colin Brown introduced that 

 ratio as from F to B natural in the scale of F, The Colonel saw 

 that F, G, A, and B natural were four consecutive long keys, 

 and so also were G, A, B, and C, therefore the ratio of the one 

 ought to do for the other. It was excellent geometry, because 

 all the keys are of the same width ; only, whether they were 

 tones or semitones cannot have entered into the Colonel's calcu- 

 lation. 



It may be assumed that Mr. Colin Brown did not construct 

 any harmonic instrument of six octaves above F, in order to hear 

 such a thorough dissonance among the quarter-tones as 45 

 vibrations sounding in cycles against 32, but that he had a sheet 



of paper before him, and added the intervals 2- to i. The 



8 4 



^ was for the major tone from F to G, and the i for the m.ajor 

 b 4 



Third from G to B. This ? from F to G, might have assisted 



8 

 the Colonel to correct his sub-dominant scale. 



Allow me to add a note which may be in time for Mr. 

 George Grove's glossary. I now recollect that the so-called 

 ' ' Comma of Pythagoras " is claimed by Boelhius, and, as his 

 treatise was once a college text-book, it was in all probability 

 from it that the moderns first applied the name "comma "to 

 that most minute of intervals. It is a favourite plaything with 

 mathematicians, but, being inaudible as a sound, whether as a 

 difference, a ratio, or any other way, it may well be spared from 

 books upon mundane music. Wm. Chappell 



Strafford Lodge, Oatlands Park, Surrey -^ 



Typicll Division of Stars. — Borrelly's Comet 



Excuse me asking you to allow me to rectify a statement in 

 Nature, vol. xv. p. 344, col. 2. It is stated there that M. 

 Konkoly has followed M. Vogel's typical division of stars. I 

 beg to observe that this typical division has been proposed by 

 myself since my first publication in 1866 (Memorie of the Societa 

 Italiana, ser. iii, tom. i. p. i) and passim in my first publica- 

 tions. 



Again you say that M. Vogel discovered, in 1871, the bright 

 lines of ^ Lyras. I beg you also to note that these lines were 

 announced by myself in my first publication of the same year, 

 1866, and even printed in the special catalogue of spectral stars, 

 published in Paris in 1867, and widely circulated (p. 21). I 

 have also announced that these lines were invisible in aftef 

 years. 



