NATURE 



i6i 



Editorial and Publishing Offices: 



MACMILLAN 6- CO., LTD., 



ST. MARTIN'S STREET, LONDON, W.C.2. 



Advertisements and business letters should be 



addressed to the Publishers. 



Editorial communications to the Editor. 



Telegraphic Address: PHUSIS, LONDON. 

 Telephone Number: GERRARD 8830. 



British Water Power and its 

 Administration. 



FOLLOWING almost immediately upon the 

 publication of the Third and Final Report 

 of the Water Power Committee of the Conjoint 

 Board of Scientific Societies, there has recently ap- 

 peared the Final Report of the Water Power Re- 

 sources Committee of the Board of Trade. To a 

 certain extent it may be said that the two Reports 

 cover common ground, but there is this important 

 distinction, that, whereas the Water Power Com- 

 mittee of the Conjoint Board addressed itself to 

 the widest possible survey of the resources of the 

 British Empire, the Board of Trade Committee 

 has been limited by its terms of reference to the 

 resources of the United Kingdom. The investiga- 

 tions, therefore, of the latter body within this re- 

 stricted area have naturally been more searching 

 and more detailed, and to that extent more complete. 

 The Report of the Board of Trade Committee 

 confirms, in general, the views which were expressed 

 in a leading article in Nature of December 8 last 

 in reviewing the earlier Report, particularly as re- 

 gards the necessity of conserving the national re- 

 sources of water power, of taking steps without 

 delay to ascertain accurately their full extent and 

 availability, and of providing effectively for their 

 economic and judicious development in the interests 

 of industrial enterprise. The Committee states, as a 

 result of its researches, that it is estimated by the 

 development of certain specified water-power 

 NO. 2728, VOL. 109] . 



schemes in Great Britain (a by no means exhaustive 

 list) that a continuous output of 210,000 kilowatts 

 could be obtained at an economic rate, and that this 

 would result in a saving in coal consumption for 

 steam-raising purposes of nearly three million tons 

 per annum. 



The statement is impressive as an instance of the 

 prodigality with which the country's power resources 

 are allowed to run to waste. But while the desira- 

 bility of effecting so appreciable a reduction in the 

 national coal bill must be clear and unmistakable 

 to all who give a thought to the matter and realise 

 the limitations of our stores of solid fuel, yet the 

 suggestion put forward in the present Report as to 

 the primary step to be taken towards this end will 

 perhaps not receive such unquestioning assent. The 

 Committee, with two dissentients, recommends the 

 establishment by Act of Parliament of a Water 

 Commission with controlling powers over the water 

 resources of England and Wales, and authority 

 to compile proper records, to allocate supplies, 

 to adjust conflicting interests, and to recom- 

 mend suitable development schemes. The public, 

 restive after a long and irksome imposition 

 of bureaucratic control, will, we feel, be 

 inclined to express sympathy with the minority 

 view of Mr. Sandford Fawcett and Mr. 

 W. A. Tait that the appointment of such a Com- 

 mission is unnecessary, and that it must necessarily 

 prove a source of further expense to the taxpayer. 

 Mr. Tait, in his separate memorandum on the pro- 

 posal, utters a justifiable warning on the inherent 

 defects of a permanent official body vested with 

 statutory powers. " Such a Commission," he says, 

 ' ' however well constituted and however open- 

 minded its members at first may be, will inevitably 

 in course of time become bureaucratic in its outlook, 

 and will in this respect be less fitted to adapt itself 

 to circumstances, as these vary from time to time, 

 than independent Committees of Parliament, who, 

 from the nature of things, approach any subject 

 with fresh minds and unbiased views." 



We confess that, to a considerable extent, we 

 share Mr. Tait's apprehensions. There is undoubt- 

 edly a tendency on the part of all official bodies to 

 become stereotyped and perfunctory. Imbued with 

 a sense of immunity from criticism, they not infre- 

 quently adopt autocratic methods, and this does not 

 endear them to the public mind. For our own part, 

 while cordially agreeing as to the urgent desirability 

 of carrying out each and all of the functions and 

 duties enumerated for the proposed Commission, we 

 are inclined to suggest that the collection and col- 



