292 



NATURE 



[January 25, 1894 



journey, in which alone is there any original information, 

 occupying the second place. From Aden Mr. Harris 

 started inland and crossed the Turkish frontier under the 

 pretence of being a Greek shopkeeper from Port Said. 

 In this way he obtained access to the disaffected province 

 of Yemen during the progress of a rebellion, reached 

 3auaa, and was naturally imprisoned by the Turkish 

 officials there, who refused to recognise his English pass- 

 port. The author finds fault with the Foreign Office for 

 not coming to his rescue, apparently forgetful that he 

 wilfully concealed his nationality at the outset, and so 

 gave use to suspicion, and forfeited any privileges to 

 which it might entitle him. From Sanaa he was sent 

 under escort to Hodeida. The illustrations are interest- 

 ing as types of the scenery and people of the Yemen, but 

 the book has no other claim to scientific notice. 



LETTERS TO THE EDITOR. 



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

 pressed by his correspondents. Neither can he undertake 

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

 ■manuscripts intended for this or any other part ^/Nature. 

 No notice is taken of anonymous communications. '\ 



The Directorship of the British Institute of Preventive 

 Medicine. 



We observe in your issue of the i8lh inst. a letter, signed 

 by Prof. Roy, respecting the appointment of a "Director" to 

 the Institute of Preventive Medicine, and purporting to 

 recount what occurred at the meetings of the Council. 



As Prof, Roy has misstated the principal facts, and has with- 

 held others which are fatal to his allegations, it is possible 

 that some of your readers may be misled, and it is there- 

 fore advisable that the real state of the matter should be 

 published. 



(i) The present appointment being one of a purely temporary 

 nature (for three years only) and at a nominal salary, is not, as 

 Prof. Roy implies, equal to that of Dr. Koch, neither is it to 

 that of M. Pasteur, who, by the way, is not, as Prof. Roy 

 implies, the Director of the Pasteur Institute. 



(2) The qualifications necessary for the office were fully con- 

 sidered by the Council, and by committees of the Council, and 

 consequently Prof. Roy's statements to the contrary are not 

 correct. 



(3) Prof. Roy's statement that he initiated the idea of the In- 

 stitute is not according to the fact. He was entrusted with 

 moving the resolution proposing the establishment, at the 

 meeting where the matter was first publicly discussed, but the 

 founding of the Institute had been in the minds of the members 

 of the Mansion House Committee and discussed among them 

 long before. 



(4) Prof Roy implies that he resigned his position as secretary 

 to the Council {sic) as a kind of protest against the latter's 

 mode of transacting business. 



This statement is incorrect. In the first place. Prof. Roy was 

 one of the secretaries to the Executive Committee, and not to 

 the Council. In the second place. Prof. Roy resigned that 

 position without making any protest whatever to the committee, 

 by whom his resignation was at once and unconditionally 

 accepted. 



(5) The subject of the temporary directorship was discussed 

 by ''gentlemen who are" or have been "directors of labora- 

 tories." Prof. Roy implies it was not so discussed by experts. 

 The error of this allegation is probably due to the fact that he 

 was absent from the Council meeting at which the question was 

 first brought up, and that he was not a member of any com- 

 mittee. It may be noted that Prof. Roy complains of non- 

 attendances. On this point his statement may at once be 

 conceded so far as he personally is concerned, since in 1893 he 

 attended but three meetings. 



(6) The question of appointment of a temporary Director was 

 stated on December 13 to be urgent, and the urgency was ad- 

 mitted by the whole Council with the exception of Prof. 

 Roy. Prof. Roy tells your readers that the statement 

 "carried no weight with him." Possibly this may have 

 been because he was absent from the previous Council 



NO. 1265, VOL. 49] 



meeting when the point of urgency was fully discussed ; but 

 such ignorance, even if admitted to be an excuse, does not 

 account for Prof. Roy now withholding the fact that when he 

 was present on the 13th ult. the reason of the urgency was fully 

 communicated to him. Also, it is not right for him to withhold, 

 as he does, the fact that the acceptance of the report of the 

 sub-committee, which was wholly conditioned by that urgency, 

 was agreed to by the Council neni. con. 



(7) Prof. Roy speaks as though the Council strongly 

 objected to the resolutions laid before it. He ignores the fact 

 that on the 13th it was but two members, including himself, and 

 on the 19th only himself, who so objected. 



(8) Prof. Roy suppresses the fact that a special meeting 

 of the Council was held on December 19 to reexamine the 

 whole question, and to confirm or reject the minutes of the 

 meeting of December 13, and that those minutes were 

 circulated to every member of the Council, and that the meet- 

 ings of the 13th and 19th were well attended. He omits to 

 mention that he circulated beforehand, and produced at the 

 meeting on the 19th, a document which he termed a 

 " protest," and that, as it contained offensive statements 

 plainly contrary to fact, the Council declined to proceed 

 with the business of the meeting until Prof. Roy withdrew his 

 "protest" unconditionally. He also suppresses the fact that 

 he did so, and that this preliminary having been executed, 

 the minutes of December 13 were then put and confirmed 

 nem. con. 



If any of your readers, after this historical statement, con- 

 sider that Prof. Roy's letter is justified in any sense, further 

 information can be supplied. 



In conclusion, it may perhaps be interesting to note the names 

 of those present on December 19. These were, for the ap- 

 pointment of the temporary Director — Sir Joseph Lister (chair- 

 man), Sir Henry Roscoe, Sir Joseph Fayrer, Prof Burdon 

 Sanderson, Prof. Michael Foster, Prof. Victor Plorsley, Mr. 

 Watson Cheyne ; while there was opposed to the appointment 

 — Prof Roy. J. Fayrer, 



Victor Horsley, 



Mover and seconder of the motion for confirmation 



of the minutes of December 13. 



The Origin of Rock Basins. 



In my previous letter I confined myself to one aspect of the 

 controversy relative to the origin of rock basins now occupied 

 by lakes, as all the other arguments adduced by Dr. Wallace-*- 

 with one exception, of which more hereafter — have already been 

 answered, and the case on either side so fully presented that 

 each one may draw his own conclusions as to which is right. 

 The particular confusion of argument I referred to has not been 

 so fully dealt with, and Dr. Wallace's letter shows that it was 

 one which required to be met, for the heading of his letter itself 

 shows that he has not fully appreciated the particular point at 

 issue, which is the cause of origin of rock basins irrespective of 

 whether they are or have ever been occupied by lakes. Leaving 

 out of question the opinions of other opponents of the glacial 

 erosion theory of the origin of lakes, as this would introduce too^ 

 large a subject for the correspondence columns of Nature, and 

 confining myself to the defence of the views put forth in my 

 former letter, I may point out that the preglacial origin of rock 

 basins by deformation is by no means the strongest form of the 

 alternative explanation ; on the contrary, it appears to me to 

 be subject to nearly as many objections as the hypothesis of 

 glacial erosion of rock basins. If a rock basin is produced by 

 deformation in a region where the valleys are not filled by 

 glaciers, the ordinary action of the streams will usually be able 

 to prevent a lake from being produced by the erosion of the 

 barrier, the filling up of the hollow, or both combined. When, 

 however, a rock basm is formed by differential movements in a 

 glacier filled valley, it would be filled with ice, and so protected 

 from sedimentation, and on the retreat of the glacier would at first 

 be filled with water, and only gradually filled with solid matter, 

 while the stream, having deposited its solid burden in the lake, 

 would be unable to exert any erosive action on the barrier. From 

 this it appears that there is a probability that rock basins formed 

 beneath the glaciers during their extension in the glacial period 

 should remain to the present day as lakes only partially filled up 

 by solid debris. 



Seeing then that there is an inherent probability that rock 

 basins formed in non-glaciated regions would never become 



