December 5, 1918] 



NATURE 



167 



and it then proceeds to set out the ways in which 

 this gratitude can best be expressed — and future 

 favours ensured. 



The beginning of demobilisation sees the almost 

 . omplete breakdown of the pre-war conditions of 

 production and distribution. The fish docks and 

 harbours were inadequate in 1913, and they are 

 still more inadequate tO-day; there arc unfair rail- 

 way rates, and delays and inconveniences in trans- 

 port and handling (there are not enough fish-boxes 

 in the country at present to contain the catch to 

 be expected in a few months); while the machinery 

 for retail distribution has broken down as the 

 result of the Military Service Acts. Already there 

 are powerful competition from Norway and an 

 almost unbelievable reorganisation and extension 

 of tin- German sea fisheries (see appendix v. of 

 the memorandum). Obviously there must be in- 

 creased production here; new means of capture; 

 discovers of new grounds and regeneration of old 

 j; policing and regulation, both international 

 and national; industrial experiment, training, edu- 

 cation, and research. There must be an end of the 

 "Victorian fallacy that science can be hired for 

 the wages of unskilled labour"; reliance by the 

 e on the results of investigation; co-ordina- 

 tion of commercial and consular activities; search 

 for new markets; and salvation "from the inanities 

 ni doctrinaire politicians." 



All these objects arc clearly unattainable as 

 things are. Why? A glance at appendices i. and 

 ii. of the memorandum \\ r ill show. There are a 

 multitude of authorities, national, central, and 

 loi al, each of them "doing its bit " — or not; each 

 more or less unco-ordinated with the rest. 

 I'd secure effective joint action by this com- 

 plex is obviously impossible. So there must 

 be a Ministry of Fisheries with an Imperial 

 General Staff, and strengthened and simplified 

 English and Scottish authorities. (The inclusion 

 ni" Ireland is, apparently, hopeless as vet.) The 

 memorandum outlines a scheme for a Ministry, 

 to a large extent, that of the United 

 - Bureau of Fisheries. 



Disregarding sectional jealousies, the scheme 

 cannot fail to obtain approval by anyone who 

 knows the conditions. Now for Mr. Prothero's 

 reception of it. The Minister was, doubtless, dis- 

 appointed by the presentation of the case by the 

 tat ion. About an hour was set aside for 

 hes, and most of this time was taken up by 

 the chairman and vice-chairman, by Sir J. 

 Crichton-Browne, who spoke about rearing pedi- 

 gree 1 od, and by Mr. J. Arthur Mutton, who dealt 

 with river pollution and the national importance 

 of the sdmon fisheries (which yielded o - 2 per cent, 

 of the 1913 total catch). Thai was about all. 

 The fishermen themselves were unrepresented, and 

 (judging from the speeches reported) so were the 

 fish-friers, the retail trade, and the preservation 

 and canning industries. 



Mr. Prothero's replv must have been equallv 



disappointing. The Board of Agriculture and 



Fisheries was, lie indicated, almost powerless with 



regard to many important matters, and a united 



NO. 2562, VOL. 102] 



Ministry of Fisheries for the United Kingdom 

 would probably be the best authority. But it 

 would be expensive; it would add to the number 

 of officials and to bureaucracy generally — and we 

 had had too much of that. He could not speak for 

 Scotland or Ireland. He could not see that a 

 Ministry of Fisheries could free itself from the 

 Board of Trade or Admiralty, nor would it be of 

 "sufficient calibre" to carry weight. So as an 

 alternative he suggested the formation of a 

 " Ministry of Water." " Why not sever land from 

 water? " Then, after some wholesome platitudes 

 as to the national services of the fisher-folk, the 

 Minister pleaded other engagements. 



So the matter remains, awaiting the attention 

 of some statesman who can put aside other 

 engagements — or that of some wholly independent 

 organisation which can influence the public and 

 so supply jhe driving force without which poli- 

 ticians seem unable to move. 



THE PROMOTION OF SCIENTIFIC AGRI- 

 CULTURE. 



\/\/^EN, in his recent speech at Wolver- 

 V * hampton, the Prime Minister spoke of 

 the need for promoting scientific agriculture, he 

 touched upon a subject of great national import- 

 ance, and it may be profitable to attempt to give 

 significance to his words. As was pointed out in 

 the last issue of Nature, it may be that what 

 Mr. Lloyd George had in mind was merely the 

 extended use of artificial manures, the discovery 

 and methods of use of which were undoubtedly 

 scientific discoveries of the first magnitude, with 

 which the name of Lawes and his experimental 

 station at Rothamsted will ever be honourably 

 associated. But we should like to think that the 

 passages in the speech to which attention was 

 directed are evidence that the Prime Minister has 

 advanced to a position which few of his political 

 forbears ever reached, namely, that progress in 

 the arts and industries is indissolubly bound up 

 with the progress of science ; and science in this 

 connection should not be limited to the "natural " 

 sciences. The application of the scientific method 

 to technical problems mav well be as potent an 

 element in progress as the adoption of the results 

 of scientific research properly so-called. The field 

 experiment in agriculture may not be research, 

 but it is futile as an experiment unless it is con- 

 ducted under the conditions and interpreted with 

 the precautions which science dictates. 



If, then, the Prime Minister has resolved that 

 agriculture shall benefit from science, his first task 

 is to take such measures as are likely to be fruitful 

 of results. It will not suffice merely to provide 

 unlimited funds even on the scale of a "day's 

 cost of the war," if at the same time a well-con- 

 sidered plan of operations has not been framed. 

 Scientific research in agriculture in the past has 

 suffered from a failure to attract a sufficient 

 number of men of first-class scientific talent. This 

 failure has been largely due to the fact that agri- 

 cultural research offered no career. Not only were 



