October 26, 1893] 



NATURE 



61 



are described as if they dropped down ready made from 

 the sky into their appropriate place. 



Many superior designs could at this rate be made for 

 the Forth Bridge ; but then this ignores an important 

 controlling element, that the bridge was to stand, not 

 only when completed, but at every intermediate stage of 

 the erection. 



Even the operation of hoisting or rolling into place a 

 forty-foot girder is not a simple matter ; during the pro- 

 cess the ordinary stresses are mostly reversed, and the 

 structure runs the risk of "cockling.'' 



We find no mention of the Tower Bridge, the most 

 important experiment of a drawbridge a bascule. G. 



The Amphioxus and its Development. By Dr. B. 

 Hatschek. Translated and edited by J. Tuckey. 

 (London : Swan Sonnenschein and Co., 1893 ) 



This is a translation of Dr. Hatschek's well-known paper 

 on the subject published twelve years ago. It will no 

 doubt enable those who cannot read German to follow 

 Dr. Hatschek's statements. But unless the rest of the 

 translation is more accurate than that of the title, 

 readers will be deceived and disappointed. This book 

 is not correctly called "Amphioxus and its Develop- 

 ment." That is a salesman's title. There is nothing in 

 it about Amphioxus, except an account of the earlier 

 part of the development. The important facts of the 

 larval development discovered by Willey, as well as the 

 adult structure, are not dealt with. The original plates 

 have not been reproduced in this translation, but very small 

 and often obscure reductions of them are substituted. 



E. R. L. 



LETTERS TO THE EDITOR. 



[ The Editor dots not hold himself responsible for opinions ex- 

 pressed by his correspondents. Neither can he undertake 

 to return, or to correspond with the vjrilers of, rejected 

 manuscripts intended for this or any other part p/'Nature. 

 No notice is taken of anonymous communications. "\ 



The Use of Scientific Terms. 



I AM glad that so distinguished a physicist as Dr. 

 Lodge has found certain matters relating to the history of 

 physiology, which I discu-sed, I fear very imperfectly, in my 

 Nottingham address, to be of sufficient interest to induce him 

 to read and criticise it. Fully appreciating the geniality with 

 which his criticisms are expressed, I will ask your permission to 

 comment on one or two points in his letter, which may not be 

 uninteresting to the readers of Nati;re. 



One of the principal objects which I had in view in my 

 address was to promote that intercommunication between the 

 physical and physiological sciences which Dr. Lodge thinks so 

 desirable, and I am no less sensible than he is that this solid- 

 arity is much impeded by inconsistency in the employment of 

 words. Your correspondent avers that whereas the language of 

 Physics consists in "simple English phrases" and "common 

 words made definite by connotation," our biological words 

 are "polysyllabic," and our modes of expression as unlike those 

 of daily life as can be contrived. We say " devitalising," for 

 instance, when we mean killing, just as the chemist says " desic- 

 cating" when he means drying. 



It is difficult to express the complicated relations which exist 

 between the phenomena of life without using terms which are 

 themselves complicated. Thus, I venture, notwithstanding Dr. 

 Lodge's good-natured pleasantry, to think that the word 

 " chemiotaxis," bad as it may be, serves better to express the 

 little that we know about the " particular go " of certain pro- 

 cesses than any simple English phrase we could substitute for it. 



Two words, " life" and " energy," are .specially referred to 

 by Dr. Lodge as examples in illustration of the inconveniences 

 which are to apt to arise from their improper use. In Physio- 

 logy the word "life" is understood to mean the chemical and 

 physical activities of the parts of which the organism consists 

 together with their co-ordination — -not the processes only, 

 nor their coordination only, but both at the same time. Dr. 



NO, J 252, VOL. 48] 



Lodge uses the word life without making it "definite in con- 

 notation," but from what is said about it, it is evident that the life 

 which he has in view is not made up of processes, but merely 

 consists in their co-ordination or adaptation for the purposes of 

 the organism ; for it is defined as the " power of directing (the 

 italics are mine) energy into otherwise unoccupied channels." 

 This being understood, all that Dr. Lodge says about life, and 

 particularly his statement that it is not a form of energy, seems to 

 me to be in accordance with the views that I endeavoured to 

 set forth in my address. The only difference, therefore, that 

 exists between us relates to the sense in which the word life is 

 to be used for scientific purposes. Next follow some trenchant 

 observations as to the misuse of the word " energy." I do not 

 think that I am accused of such misuse. Nevertheless it may 

 be useful to note that in referring to the sense in which J. 

 Miiller and his illustrious pupil had used the term "specific 

 energy," it was expressly stated that their use of it was in 

 a sense entirely different from that in which it is employed 

 in physical science ; and further, that the words quoted from the 

 " Physiological Optics," viz. "energies of the nerves of special 

 sense," were written in 1886, not "long ago," as Dr. Lodge 

 suggests. 



i can assure your readers that to the best of my knowledge 

 the word "energy" is never used in the old sense by physio- 

 logical writers, excepting, so to speak, between inverted commas: 

 and with reference to the historical importance of Miiller's doc- 

 trine, and still more of Helniholtz's earlier physiological writings, 

 the words "normal activity," or others of similar import, 

 are substituted for " specific energy," not as necessarily meaning 

 anything quantitative, but simply the mode in which the organ 

 normally reacts. 



To the suggestion that "subjective light" should in future 

 be designated by an impressive-looking word beginning with 

 photo and ending with taxis, I have no objection to mike, ex- 

 cepting that it might turn out to be rather sesquipedalian. May 

 I add, that I hope to have the opportunity of recurring to the 

 subject of the vision of the totally colour-blind. 



J. BuRDON Sanderson. 



The Thieving of Antiquities. 



A RECENT case, which has occupied some space in Nature, 

 raises much larger issues than the character of individuals, and 

 issues which must be faced sooner or later. 



The present conditions of the laws and practice regarding 

 antiquities is most unhappy, both in the interests of science and 

 in the interests of museums. Two matters require much re- 

 vision : (i) The modes of excavating; (2) the laws regarding 

 excavation and exportation. 



As to the mode of excavating it is still generally the custom 

 to leave much in the hands of native overseers, and often the 

 European in charge does not live on the work. Until it is 

 recognised that it is unjustifiable to disturb antiquities without 

 recording everything that can be observed, we shall remain in 

 the state of mere plunderers, without a claim much higher than 

 that of the treasure-hunting natives. In Egypt, hitherto, nearly 

 all official excavations have been made by trusting entirely to un- 

 educated and dishonest native overseers ; and while the laws 

 are strict concerning Europeans working, the natives plunder 

 almost at their will under one pretext or another. With suitable 

 regulation it has been proved practicable to entirely excavate a 

 site without any loss or pilfering of the smallest objects by the 

 natives; and such excavation, entirely under trained and 

 educated observers, either native or foreign, should be the aim 

 in all future work. 



But in the matter of the legal position it is far more difficult 

 to reach a satisfactory basis. Baldly stated the case stands 

 thus. Every country in which there is anything much worth 

 having, stringently prohibits exportation and excavation ; 

 and nearly all the growth of museums of foreign antiquities 

 is in direct defiance of the laws. Most countries are 

 engaged in thieving from others on a grand scale, by various 

 underhand agencies ; a form of thieving which is as much 

 tolerated by public opinion as smuggling was in former days 

 According to law, no antiquities of any kind can possibly leave 

 Turkish or Greek territory, and nothing that is of great im- 

 portance can leave Italian or Egyptian territory. Yet museums 

 grow. 



The actual course of affairs is that some private agent, or 

 museum official, hears of something important, and buys it up 



