572 



AMERICAN MEN OF SCIENCE 



tific men in their populations 51 and 47 per 

 million now show the greatest gains. Nearly 

 one fourth of the new men on the list reside 

 in these two states, which have but 5 per cent, 

 of the population of continental United States. 

 At the same time, a comparatively small per- 

 centage of their scientific men have failed to 

 maintain their places on the list, so that their 

 net gains have been 22, or about 12 per cent. 

 The figures refer to new men who have ob- 

 tained places among the thousand in the 

 course of the past seven years or to those who 

 have lost their places on the list, and not to 

 men who have maintained their places and 

 have removed from one state to another. 

 These two states have been fortunate in the 

 possession or skilful in the selection of young 

 men of ability; and credit should be given to 

 their three great educational institutions 

 Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute and 

 Yale. Another center of scientific activity 

 and growth is found in the states of Illinois 

 and Wisconsin, and is there also due to three 

 leading universities. Illinois has 28 and 

 Wisconsin 13 of the men added, while of those 

 dropped from the list Illinois has 18 and Wis- 

 consin none. The two states have a net gain 

 of 23 men, or about 28 per cent. Missouri 

 also shows a gain, while the other north cen- 

 tral states remain about stationary. 



New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania 

 have more men who have died or been crowded 

 off the list of the first thousand scientific men 

 than have attained places on it. The net loss 

 has been 22 in New York, 3 in New Jersey 

 and 12 in Pennsylvania. This is a sinister 

 record for this center of vast wealth with its 

 richly endowed universities. These three 

 states can but ill bear comparison with the 

 two progressive centers in the northeast and 

 north central states. 



The District of Columbia has 26 of the men 

 added and 36 of the men dropped out. It has 

 suffered more serious losses from death than 

 any other region. Washington and the scien- 

 tific bureaus under the government have lost 

 somewhat. Large appropriations "are made 

 and useful work is done, but there seems to be 



a lack of men of genius and a paucity of 

 important discovery. The Smithsonian Insti- 

 tution under Henry, Baird and Langley, the 

 Geological Survey under Powell, the Naval 

 Observatory when Newcomb and Hall were 

 there, had promise and distinction which they 

 lack to-day. 



The western states have about maintained 

 their creditable position, while the southern 

 states have fallen still further behind. South 

 Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Mississippi, Ala- 

 bama, Louisiana, Tennessee and Kentucky had 

 among them only 10 scientific men in the list 

 of 1903. One man has been added and six 

 lost. This record must be characterized as 

 discreditable. The policy which leaves the 

 south almost without scientific leaders is most 

 foolish, even from the strictly utilitarian point 

 of view. It appears that here too " he that 

 hath, to him shall be given : and he that hath 

 not, from him shall be taken even that which 

 he hath." 



The institutions with which two or more of 

 the men added to the list are connected, to- 

 gether with those dropped, are given in Table 

 II. As has been already indicated, Harvard, 

 the Massachusetts Institute of Technology 

 and Yale in New England, and Chicago, Illi- 

 nois and Wisconsin in the north central region 

 have been particularly fortunate in the pos- 

 session of younger men who have acquired 

 scientific reputation in the course of recent 

 years. The same institutions have been 

 equally happy in not having many men who 

 have lost their positions on the thousand. 

 This double success can not be attributed to 

 chance, but must indicate skill in the selection 

 of men or an environment favorable to good 

 work. The Johns Hopkins and Stanford also 

 stand well. Columbia, Cornell and California 

 are the three universities which have lost the 

 most. While Harvard and Yale have about 

 three times as many men who have won a 

 place as have lost it, Columbia has twice as 

 many who have been dropped from the list as 

 have been added to it. In the other universi- 

 ties and colleges the changes have been 

 smaller, but they have considerable signifi- 



