248 



• KNOWLEDGE 



[Sei't. 8, 1882. 



food in science, and I know that tlie kind of food purveyed, 

 for eiaiuple, at Soutliauipton this year, would emphatically 

 fio* suit American tastes, whether in the United States or 

 in Canada. 



But the Times, in an article which even in this silly 

 season stands out conspicuous for combined silliness and 

 insolence, finds a " more excellent " reason for disapproving 

 the selivtion. This is what the Tiiitm (or some one who, 

 having for the time the run of Jupiter's house, has found 

 and put on an inappropriate lion-skin) tells us about 

 Canadian science : — 



" Canada is great in extent, but not great in science. 

 HumbKr scientific views and less advanced thoughts than 

 till' British Association will bring with it would serve her 

 as well for any instruction she will derive from them. Our 

 scientific men must be well aware of this. They can have 

 no seriiius purpose of holding a scientific meeting in Canada. 

 Their wish must be to have an agreeable outing, to be 

 looked up to with blank wonderment, to be pointed out 

 wherever they go as the men who have done something or 

 other which no other human beings have succeeded in 

 doing, the magicians of the modern workl, men skilful 

 in strange, out of-the-way arts. Their acquirements and 

 their performances will be alike taken on faith. If 

 they talk sens<-, they will be listened to. H they talk 

 nonsense, they will be listened to all the same, and with 

 the same degree of intelligent appreciation. We must not 

 be surprised that our scientific men like the pose and the 

 surroundings. They are mortal beings, of the same 

 passions as the rest, and capable of being attracted in the 

 same way as the rest We do not at all grudge them the 

 glory and the pleasure in store for them on their Canadian 

 \Tsit Our only regret is that the gain of Canada will be 

 our loss, and that in lt<8t, if the present design is carried 

 out, we shall be deprived of the scientific lessons which the 

 Association has given us during the last half-century. The 

 invitation to Canada ought not, we think, to be accepted. 

 A meeting of the Association in Canada can be in no sense 

 the same thing as a meeting on English ground would be. 

 But that the invitation should have been given, and should 

 have been pressed, and that the way for its acceptance 

 should have Wen as smooth as it could be, are very wel- 

 come signs of Canadian good feeling to the mother country. 

 The wish of our colonists Ls that they should not be con- 

 sidered strangers to us. Their country is to be a part of 

 our country. We are to be at home on their soil. The 

 British As.sociution is to be the common property of Great 

 Britain and of Greater Britain. We are glad to be on 

 these terms with Canada and with our other colonies. 

 They are our rivals already in -some things more congenial 

 to their habits of life than scientific pursuits are. They 

 have met us as oarsmen, and have beaten us so complet<;ly 

 as to make us a little ashamed of ourselves. Special rules 

 liave had to be invented, in the interest of our pot- 

 hunters, to prevent them from carrying away too many 

 prizes at our regattas. In cricket we can hold our own, 

 but even in cricket Australia runs us close." There is 

 much more of this, but qiiorsum Imc Uim pulida leiidaiUt 

 " Australian cricket has been a somewhat new revelation 

 to us. We knew that they played cricket in Australia, 

 but until they came over to this country and gave us proof 

 what they could do, we had no notion that they played it 

 so exceedingly well. Contests of this kind, on the river, 

 or on the cricket-field, or with the rifle, are healthy in 

 every way. If they go againht us, we must accept our fate 

 with the In-st grace wn can, and must take comfort in the 

 thought that we have lieen l»eaten by men of our own race 

 and blood. But when the challenge la transferred to other 

 ground, when we are atkcd to send our best scientific re- 



presentatives to Canada, we may fairly ask for some proof • 

 that Canada is deserving of the compliment Her 

 hospitable intentions are beyond all doubt, but if her 

 hospitality is accepted, it must bo accepted on its own 

 account, and not with any added notion that Canada is a 

 fit place for a scientific gathering. We shall be sorry if 

 the British Association is tempted away from its home 

 duties for the sake of a run in Canada. With the move- 

 ments of its members as individuals we have nothing to 

 do, and surely Canada might be content to receive thom as 

 individuals, without insisting that they shall conio as an 

 associated host, and under a corporate name which has not 

 been of their own cn^ation, and which is not at their own 

 disposal, but is common English property." 



NEW VIEWS ON CRICKET. 



SPEAKING of the cricket changes recently suggested 

 in these columns, " A Lover of Cricket " makes the 

 following remarks in the 'Times for September 1st : — "The 

 suggested change is simply that while, as now, wicket after 

 wicket should fall on either side till the tenth and last was 

 taken, the fall of separate wickets should alternate between 

 the two elevens, instead of the fall of all on one side alter- 

 nating with the fall of all on the other. Thus, call the two 

 sides A and B. Say side A, having won the toss, go to the 

 wickets, the ground suiting them. After a while they lose 

 a wicket ; then side B go in, on ground very little changed, 

 till, in turn, they lose a wicket Side A go again to the 

 wicket, sending in a man to replace the one whose wicket 

 has fallen, precisely as in the game as usually played. 

 After another wicket lost on side A, side B do likewise. 

 And thus the sides alternate, wicket after wicket falling on 

 either side, till the first innings is completed, the record of 

 the innings appearing in precisely the same form as at 

 present Then a second innings is commenced, and, if 

 possible, played out in the same way ; if time does not 

 allow this, the game is decided by the score when B's last 

 wicket fell, at which time, of course, sides A and B have 

 lost an ecjual number of wickets. If, on the other hand, 

 the second innings is completed long before time is up 

 (some time limit, as an hour or two hours, might be 

 named in the laws), sides A ond B would continue to send 

 in man after man as before, till time expired. 



" To illustrate this method, take the recent match between 

 the Australians and England from the end of the first 

 innings. The Australians, then in a minority of 38, would 

 have sent in Massie and Bannerman, who (playing as they 

 actually did) would have knocked off the deficiency and 

 put 28 runs to the good before Ma.ssie's wicket fell. Then 

 England would have sent in Hornby and Grace, who would 

 have only knocked oil' 15 of the 1.'8 before Hornby's wicket 

 fell ; so that when the Australians went in, with Banner- 

 man and Boimor, they would have been 13 to the good, 

 increased to 17, when Bonnor's middle stump was knocked 

 out of the ground. The loss of Barlow's wicket would 

 have left England still 17 behind; and the loss of Ban 

 nernian's on the other side would have left the balance 

 unchanged. Then Grace and Uly(!tt putting on 3G would 

 have put England ahead by 19 runs. And so the game would 

 have gone on with alternating positions (most intijresting 

 to spectators), till the end of the B(rcoiid innings, with 

 England seven in arrears. But that would not have been 

 the end of the game. All the remaining time on Tuesday 

 and on Wednesday would have been occupied with a most 

 interesting contest between the two elevens. 



" It is claimed — and with obvious justice — for this method 



