September 22, 1898 



NATURE 



51 



Bridge on two wind gauges of 300 square feet and of i^ square 

 feet respectively, indicated that with an increase of area the 

 unit of pressure fell off in a very marked degree. Under the 

 same conditions of wind and exposure, the larger gauge registered 

 a pressure 387 per cent, less per square foot than the smaller 

 gauge. I have been able to carry experiments further at the 

 Tower Bridge by observing the pressure on the surface of the 

 bascules of the bridge as evidenced by the power exerted by the 

 actuating engines. In this case we have a wind gauge of some 

 5000 feet in area, and it has been shown that, while small 

 anemometers placed on the fixed parts of the bridge adjoining 

 the bascules register from 6 to 9 lbs. per square foot, the wind 

 pressure on the bascules is only from i to i^ lbs. per square 

 foot. 



It is difficult to imagine the amount of money which has been 

 expended in unnecessary provision against wind strains of 56 lbs. 

 per square foot on large areas in consequence of this hurried 

 generalisation from insufficient data. I know something of 

 what the provision for 56 lbs. on the square foot for wind cost 

 at the Tower Bridge, and I do not wish to mention it ; but if 

 the public had been told that the dictum of experts, arrived at 

 however hastily in 1880, was to be set aside in the construction 

 of that bridge, all confidence would have been beforehand 

 destroyed in it, and I suppose no Committee of Parliament 

 would have passed the Act. 



I have mentioned these matters, which could be added to by 

 many similar instances in other branches of applied science, not 

 for the sake of reviving old controversies or of throwing a stone 

 at highly distinguished men, honoured in their lifetime and 

 honoured in their memory, nor for the sake of criticising more 

 modern men of science or a Government Department. Still 

 less do I wish to question the necessity and value of mathe- 

 matical calculations as applied to the daily work of engineering 

 science, but I recall the circumstances for the purpose of once more 

 pointing out the extreme value of experimental research and of 

 bespeaking the utmost caution against our being tempted to lay 

 down laws based on unascertained data. We know the tendency 

 there has been at all times to generalise and to seek refuge in 

 formulae, and we cannot but know that it is not at an end now. 

 We ought to recognise and remember how few physical questions 

 had been exhaustively examined sixty years ago, and may I say 

 how comparatively few have even now been fundamentally dealt 

 with by experiment under true scientific conditions? The in- 

 vestigation of physical facts under all the various conditions 

 which confront an engineer requires much care, intelligence, 

 time, and last, not least, not a little money. In urging the vital 

 necessity of investigations, I am sure that I shall not be under- 

 stood as decrying the value of the exact analysis of mathematics, 

 but we must be quite sure that the premises are right before we 

 set to work to reason upon them. We should, then, exert all 

 our influence against lules or calculations based merely on 

 hypothesis, and not be content with assumptions when facts can 

 be ascertained, even if such ascertainment be laborious and 

 costly. In a word, let us follow sound inductive science, as 

 distinguished from generalisations; for "Great is truth and 

 mighty above all things." 



In connection with this subject, I may congratulate the 

 Association generally, and this Section in particular, that there 

 is now more hope for experimental science and some endow- 

 ment of research in this country than at any former time. The 

 vital necessity of further work in these directions has long been 

 recognised by men of science and was notably urged by Prof. 

 Oliver Lodge. Last year, in no small degree owing to the 

 exertions of Sir Douglas Galton, K.C.B., who presided over 

 the British Association in 1895, and brought the question very 

 prominently forward in his inaugural address on that occasion, a 

 highly influential deputation waited on the Premier to urge that 

 England should have a Public Physical Laboratory at which 

 facts could be arrived at, constants determined, and instruments 

 standardised. The importance of the questions which could be 

 determined at such an institution in their influence on the trade 

 and prosperity of the country, independently of the advance- 

 ment of purely scientific knowledge, cannot well be exaggerated. 

 Our Government, while somewhat limiting the scope of the 

 inquiry, appointed a small Committee to examine and report 

 un this highly important subject. It is no breach of confidence 

 to say that the Committee, after taking much evidence, visiting 

 a similar and highly successful institution on the continent, and 

 studying the question in all its bearings, were convinced of the 

 great public benefits which may be expected from such an 



XO. 1508. VOL. 58] 



institution, and have unanimously reported in favour of its 

 establishment. 



I feel sure that we shall all earnestly hope that Government 

 will carry out the views of the Committee, and I venture to 

 suggest that each of us should use what influence he may have, 

 to induce the Chancellor of the Exchequer to find adequate 

 funds for an institution which may be of the greatest benefit not 

 merely to scientific research, but to the commerce of these 

 islands, threatened as it is on all sides by foreign competition 

 of the most vigorous description — a competition which is sup- 

 ported by every weapon which the science of other lands can 

 forge for use in the struggle. It being acknowledged that our 

 own work in life is to deal with physical facts and apply them 

 for the use of our fellow-men, we may have good hopes that at 

 such an institution as I have indicated, directed, as it no doubt 

 will be, by the highest scientific superintendence, we shall be 

 able, at least far better than at present, to have a sound know- 

 ledge of many facts which are obscure, and to deal with the 

 many new conditions under which the applied science of the 

 future will have to be carried on. 



Those who know most of the problems of nature feel the more 

 strongly how much remains which is unknown and realise how 

 completely those who teach require throughout their lives to be 

 always learners. Let each of us then in our special walk of life, 

 seeking for further enlightenment on the various problems of our 

 work and in the application of that science which we love, 

 humbly recognise that, 



" All nature is but art, unknown to thee ; 

 All chance, direction which thou canst not see ; 

 All discord, harmony not understood." 



INTERNATIONAL SEA FISHERIES 

 CONGRESS AT DIEPPE. 



'T'HE movement for the international discussion of matters 

 -*■ connected with the sea-fishing industry has made such 

 progress during the past few years that a summary of the pro- 

 ceedings of the recent international congress held at Dieppe 

 should interest readers of Nature, especially as the regulatioa 

 of the industry tends more and more to be determined in accord- 

 ance with the evidence accumulated by scientific investigators. 

 The Dieppe Congress was organised by the Societe d'Enseigne- 

 ment professionel et technique des Peches Maritimes, and is the 

 second international congress promoted by that society. The 

 previous congress was held at Sables-d'Olonne in 1896, on 

 which occasion Mr. (now Sir) John Murray was the British 

 representative. More than 300 delegates assembled at Dieppe, 

 among whom may be mentioned Mr. C. E. Fryer, of the Board 

 of Trade ; Dr. J. H. Fullarton, formerly of the Scottish Fishery 

 Board ; Mr. Walter Garstang, representing the Marine Biological 

 Association ; Mr. O. T. Olsen, of Grimsby ; Mr. Johnsen, of 

 Hull ; Drs. Brunchorst and Bull, of Bergen ; Dr. Malm, of 

 Gothenburg ; M. Tabary, of Ostend ; Prof. Vinciguerra, of 

 Rome ; Dr. Valle, of Trieste ; Dr. Kishinouye, of Japan ; Mr. 

 Thorndike Nourse, of the United States ; and of course a large 

 number of French delegates representing the Government and 

 various fishery societies and schools, fishing centres and 

 municipalities, including M. Roche, Inspector-General of 

 Fisheries ; Prof. Perrier, Baron Jules de Guerne, MM. Lavieu- 

 ville, of Dieppe ; Canu, of Boulogne ; Odin, of Sables-d'Olonne ; 

 Gourret, of Marseilles ; and Le Seigneur, of Granville. The 

 proceedings of the Congress opened on the morning of September 

 2 with an address from the President, Prof. Ed. Perrier, Membre 

 de rinstitut de France. The greater part of the President's 

 address was devoted to an examination of purely French 

 problems — the relative scarcity of steam trawlers and liners, 

 the need of greater solidarity, of a'spirit of co-operation and com- 

 promise among rival fishing industries, the present unsatis- 

 factory arrangements — or lack of arrangements — for fishery re- 

 search. This, he said, seemed to demand the creation of 

 a central Fishery Board for France, similar to that of Scotland, 

 which should be charged with the duty of coordinating the work 

 of the numerous marine laboratories in which fishery research is 

 now carried on without concerted aim. Proceeding then to 

 matters of more general interest, he pointed out the advantages 

 which would ensue if the study of plankton could be put upon 

 an international basis by a regular organisation of the marine 

 laboratories of different countries, or by international co- 

 operation in deep-sea expeditions for the solution of problems 



