258 



NATURE 



[April 28, 192 1 



education and research in the Estimates, which 

 show the following reductions compared with the 

 Estimates for last year : — Agricultural and dairy 

 education (grants in aid), 33,000/. ; agricultural 

 research (grants in aid), 6100L ; agricultural re- 

 search, 61,190/.; experiments ancl instruction in 

 fruit preservation, 8745/. The only increase 

 under the head of agricultural education and re- 

 search is that of 3650/. for the National Institute 

 of Agricultural Botany and Seed Testing Station. 

 By the side of these great reductions we have an 

 increase of 94,000/. in the estimate for salaries 

 in the agricultural branch of the Ministry. 



The Estimates for the Fisheries Department of 

 the Ministry show similar decreases for research 

 and similar increases on the administrative side. 

 The differences mav be summarised as follows : — 



Administration, salaries, 



wages, allowances, legal 

 and incidental expenses. 

 AH this properly called 



Administrative Expendi- 

 ture. 



62,969/. 



85.43V- 



The /Mrrtfa«</ expenditure for 1931-22 is 22,465/. 



Fishery research in general 

 and fishery research grants 

 in aid. 



Scientific Research. 



The flV^vfaj^^/ expenditure for 1921-22 is 24,675/. 



Shellfish research and de- 

 velopment, development 

 of inshore fisheries, econ- 

 omic destruction of inshore 

 pests, elvers distribution 

 scheme. 



Developnu nt of Inshore 

 Fisheries based on Scien- 

 tific Research. 



The «/(ff«'^a5far expenditure for 1921-22 is 30, 175/. 



It will be seen that in each branch of the 

 Ministry there has been a considerable in- 

 crease in the cost of administration — that is, 

 the cost of carrying out duties that are apart 

 from scientific research and development. In 

 the Fisheries Department, for example, the 

 administrative staff employed in 1920-21 (secre- 

 taries, principals, clerks, writing assistants, 

 typists, etc.) numbered sixty-two; but it is ninety- 

 one in 1921-22. The inspectorial staff (that is, 

 inspectors, technical assistants, fishery officers, 

 surv-eyors, collectors of statistics, messengers, 

 NO. 2687, VOL. 107] 



charwomen, etc.) was forty-eight in 1920-21 ; 

 but it is sixty-two in 1921-22. Against that we 

 have a scientific staff of eighteen in 1920-21, and 

 of twenty-one in 1921-22. 



We search in vain for a justification of the 

 increased expenditure on administration. The 

 condition of the fishery industry is one of un- 

 precedented depression. Big breaks in wages are 

 contemplated or have been effected, and labour 

 troubles are threatened. The withdrawal of the 

 herring bounties is likely to lead to the laying up 

 of half the East Coast fleets. Exporting has 

 largely diminished. Inshore fishing is decadent. 

 Either administration is impotent when confronted 

 with such economic tendencies, or it thrives upon 

 them. In the face of such industrial depression it 

 is difficult to find a reason for the large increase in 

 the cost of administering the fishery statutes. 

 Frankly, we do not understand why the 

 Ministry largely increases its administrative 

 machinery while economising on development 

 (which is surely the means of counteracting indus- 

 trial depression) and on research (which provides 

 the rationale for successful development). Obvi- 

 ously these Estimates ought to be explained and 

 justified, if possible, for otherwise they suggest 

 an incompetent administration, or a degree of 

 misunderstood economy and control exerted by 

 the Treasury against the better judgment of the 

 Ministry. We might be inclined to take the 

 latter view were it not for the increased cost of 

 purely administrative services, which must have 

 been suggested by the Ministry itself. 



It is true that in the debate in the House 

 of Commons Mr. Acland directed attention to 

 the increased expenditure on administration 

 and to the decreased provision for research, 

 but no satisfactory explanation was forth- 

 coming. So far as we are concerned, the 

 opportunity for criticism is afforded only 

 after Parliament has voted the money ; and 

 it will be the same next year, unless some 

 body of scientific men obtains early copies of the 

 Estimates and provides suitable representatives in 

 Parliament with material evidence in support of 

 their case for consideration. Criticism of the 

 Estimates is, however, very difficult because of 

 the form in which they are issued. It is impos- 

 sible to resist the impression that the statement 

 of the expenditure incurred and contemplated is 

 made so as to convey the, least possible informa- 

 tion as to detail. This impression may be a mis- 

 taken one, but if it is the fault lies in the manner 

 in which the Estimates are framed and published. 



