KNOWLEDGE & SCIENTIFIC NEWS. 



[Mar., 1905. 



Western people as a nation of intelligrent and artistic 

 children; but I fail to see how a scientific knowledge 

 would enable us to derive accurate and numerical value 

 from the subtle and remarkable qualities which have 

 enabled Japan in a few years to raise itself to the 

 level of a great Western nation, nor how we could 

 set about the business of producing such a race. 

 Without some quantitative method of measuring all 

 the qualities which make the higher type of man, the 

 direct application of scientific methods would be im- 

 possible. 



Creation of Species. 



To THE Editors of " Ksoulkdge." 



Dear Sirs, — In Mr. Shenstone's interestin;: article on 

 Heredity, on p. 17. he writes :—" The belief that every form 

 of animal plant owes its existence to a special act of creation 

 and . . . accorded with the tenets of the Churches." 



The last few words are somewhat vague, but the only theo- 

 logical dogmas bearing on the subject are those held by the 

 opposing schools of Traducianism and Creationism. The 

 latter, it is true, held that ever>' soul (i.^., every separate life 

 above that of the vegetable world) is separately created ; this 

 is, however, by no means inconsistent with any theory of 

 heredity on evolution. While the more widely held theory of 

 Traducianism— that every life is derived from another lite— 

 naturally leads to some form of evolution, and would cover the 

 most violent deductions therefrom. 



The writer's further allusions show that he is referring to 

 popular prejudice or superstition; but it is hardly possible to 

 style this the " tenets of the Churches." 



Yours very faithfully, 



Verwood, Dorset, January 14, 1905. Herbert Drake. 



^^^^^^ 



Lighthouse Illumination. 



HEi.inoi.AND Lir.iiTHOLSE carries one of the greatest 

 searchlights actually in use, and its candle power is 

 placed at the rather incomprehensible figure of 

 30,000,000. Such a figure conveys very little, but the 

 Schuckert Company of Nuremburg, which built the 

 light, have constructed a still larger one, for which 

 they claim an illuminating capacity equal to 

 316,000,000 candles. If it were possible to set this 

 giant on a tower three hundred feet high its rays could 

 easily be detected 80 miles away, and those who 

 cherish fancies about light telephony can even imagine 

 that conversations could be made audible by it at such 

 distances. The searchlight has a diameter of 

 6 ft. 6 ins., which would be a large size for a church 

 clock, and it is built with an iris shutter, such as some 

 modern cameras have. The leaves of the shutter slide 

 within a fixed diaphragm in the axis of the ray of light, 

 and the electrical control is such as to enable the shutter 

 to govern the movement of the beam of light in hori- 

 zontal or vertical directions. By the side of these the 

 flash light lately installed at St. Catharine's Point 

 seems but an insignificant beacon, for it is only of 

 15,000,000 candle power. But it is five times as 

 powerful as the light it replaces, and it is believed that 

 in clear weather its flicker will be perceptible from the 

 French coast. The lens has been made in Birming- 

 ham. The revrjhing portion of the mechanism, instead 

 of being mounted on rollers as hitherto, floats in a big 

 trough of mercury, and rotation is easily and accurately 

 brought about by a clockwork mt-chanism of a kind not 

 unlike that in old eight-day cincks. The electrical 

 energy of the light is derived from the same magneto- 

 electric generators which ha\e been working for 17 

 vears now without a breakdown. 



Why "Common"? 



By F. G. Afi.alo, F.R.G.S., F.Z.S. 



The careless use of the word "common" is apparent 

 in our every-day language. To take a familiar instance, 

 we call " common sense " that which is about the rarest 

 kind of sense known. The strongest objection, however, 

 to which the word lays itself open is in zoological nomen- 

 clature, in which it is in constant use as a trivial specific 

 distinction: thus Common Seal, Common Gull, (."v:c. 



The two Latin equivalents, lomminiis, vulgaris, are, if 

 anything, yet more reprehensible, not only by reason of 

 their greater scientific weight, but because their cos- 

 mopolitan currency tends to aggravate a geographical 

 fallacy that will presently be indicated. 1 am not Latin 

 scholar enough to differentiate the shades of meaning 

 between the two in their zoological application to certain 

 species of animals. In another meaning, the sensiim coin- 

 tnitnem of Phaedrus, or the nilgaiis saisKS of Cicero, the 

 nuances are obvious, and can be respectively rendered, I 

 imagine, by common sense and the feelings common to 

 humanity. But as zoological terms I shall, subject to 

 correction, regard them as identical, and therefore open 

 to the same criticisms. 



It is proposed, for the sake of brevity, to draw 

 examples that illustrate the drawbacks of these terms 

 from British vertebrate forms only; it will be easy for 

 anyone wishing to do so to extend the inquiry to both 

 invertebrate and exotic species. 



Let us have done with the two Latin equivalents first. 

 As regards British vertebrates, communis is, in the 

 majority of systems, used of only four forms: Coturnix, 

 Gnis, Plioccena, and Turtur. As regards G;ks, which, how- 

 ever common it may once have been in these islands, 

 cannot by any stretch of the imagination be so described 

 at the present day, it is true that Mr. Harting has 

 adopted cinerea as a more satisfactory specific name for a 

 bird rarely seen hereto-day outside of menageries, though 

 it bred freely a couple of centuries ago. Yet it is a pity 

 that he should not also have found an equally satisfactory 

 substitute in the case of Coturnix, for quails are nowa- 

 days so rare, thanks in great measure to wasteful 

 slaughter on the Mediterranean littoral, that every occur- 

 rence is considered worth recording in sporting and 

 ornithological journals. As to the turtle-dove, it would 

 be interesting to know in what part of the country it 

 can accurately be indicated as common. The marine 

 mammal, the fourth of these, will be dealt with later. 



The other Latin specific prefix is in much more general 

 use, and nearly thirty British vertebrate forms, or 

 approximately two-thirds, are fishes. The full list of 

 British beasts, birds, amphibians, and fishes distinguished 

 in many writers as vulgaris are as follow: — Mammals: 

 Sorex, Lutra, Musiela, Sciurus. Birds: Sturnus, Vanellus. 

 Amphil)ian : Molge. Fishes: Acanthias, Anguilla, Barbus, 

 Belone, Box, Conger, Dentex, Galeus, Ilippoglossus, Leuciscus, 

 Liparis, Lola, Mcrluccius, Molva, Mustelus, Pagrus, Solea, 

 Thymallus, Tinea, 



The use of the word vulgaris in respect of types like 

 the otter, squirrel, starling, or lapwing, which are the 

 only speciesof their genus known in these islands, cannot 

 be reasonably objected to like the similar use of the 

 Lnglish equivalent "common," for the Latin designation 

 is used in all countries subscribing to what we may term 

 the international scientific union, and is tiiere admis- 

 sible so long as this particular species is, generally speak- 

 ing, commoner than the rest. Of the lapwing, it is to be 

 observed that Mr. Harting and most modern authorities 



