I ' '.IfiER H). [gi8] 



NATURE 



305 



11 would. M> working life has been passed in a greal 

 al region where this Faint-hearted belief in the 



utilit; "i sci has been the on< 11 al obstacle to 



-1 ieni e of ever) kind. Al Leeds 

 I have occupied myself greatlj with the promotion of 

 applied science, .1- in flutj bound. Bui it has also 

 been in the sure and certain hopi thai applied scienci , 



of the nanir and 1 1 allj win tin 11I aco ptam 

 b) industry, was indissolubly linked in bonds of mutual 

 li'-ni -i'ii 'ii 1I1. purest and highest scienci thai was 

 ever dreamed of even by m\ chemical brethren, whose 

 unworldly "stinks" profane th< of more 



Si qui sti 1 ed seats ol 



- been a har d though it would bi 



unjust to ,1 no gains, I long since 



cami in thi conclusion thai nothing shorl of a national 



i was likely to bring about anything approach- 



1 hange of heart th bli and so 



sarj . 



■ iclysm nl war has, in fact, done this great 

 enci h 1 indi iutabli 1 idence ol 



it, and I believe thai .11 lasl 1 >i i t i -li industry is 

 rally, nol exceptionally, on it- waj to use scienci 

 well. That being so, I ask : Is there any possible 

 escape for British industry and the British public from 

 loting pure science, and promoting i' handsome!) ? 

 I .in nol see it. Of course, the) will not begin In 

 endowing professorships in radio-activity or relativity, 

 nor mi, perhaps, in that ver) pun- chemistry which 

 i- the dearesl thing to me; bul they will be obliged to 

 do it, and to do it before long. In the- first instance, 

 the) will a-k for what the) iniw-kuow they want: 

 first-rate men who can apph science to the practical 

 in- nl industry. Already to a large extent the) 

 know thai 9uch nun must have in them the root of 

 the matter in the form of real scientific knowledge and 

 skill, and it will follow as thi da) the night (if you 

 so regard it) thai science, pun and simple, must also 

 be thi objeel of their self-interested or patriotic 

 tude. 

 I, I'm urn, -hall In- glad in have ii mi those term-. 

 For what, lei us frankl) say, are the alternatives fot 

 pure science? One 1 have jusl tried to set forth; 

 the other, it seems to me, is a direct appeal for pure 

 science, either because it i- pure or because ii i- 

 useful. If you extol ii because ii is pure, it is a 

 worthy effort that I should honour with all my heart 

 • condition, and that i- thai you should avoid the 

 incalculable mischief of trying to make out that then 

 i- in essence any distinction between pun- and applied 

 that \uu should give jusl cause lor the 

 belief thai then- exists a brotherhood in science who 

 - 1 themselves up a- the eleel and disdain the implica- 

 tions of science in the practical arts that serve and 

 preserve mankind. 



It m.ii extol pure science simply because ii is useful 



which In hypothesis you do nol wanl to do Mm 



embark on ilv task, long since essayed and long sus- 



tained, of teaching people l>\ exhortation whal al 



la-t the) an- in the V a riding OUt surely for 



themselves. To do that run- counter to all the pre- 

 I have drawn from my experience of teaching. 

 I know very well what ii is to be a prophet of 

 pure -1 ience, even if only a minor or a minimus one, 

 crying in the wilderness, and believe 1 can enter some- 

 what into the feelings of thi major and maximus 

 ho are anxious and impatient under the present 

 aspect of affairs. Bul the) ma) bi isked earnestly 

 onsider the other point of view also, and to 

 bethink themselves whether, after all, a greal deal ol 

 the Philistinism of our people is nol due to the detach- 

 ment of locality, of interest, and of intercourse thai 

 in the past has been just!) chargeable to the world 

 of learning. 



The Firitish Association fm the Vdvancemenl of 

 2564, VOL. I02] 



Science was founded foi the purposi of bringing a 

 knowledge of science, ii- glories and its' uses, 

 among the people. Ii has done a -.cat work, a much 

 greater work than i- known 10 thosi who will nol 

 sacrifice .1 week ol the Alps or the oceans 1.1 do theii 

 liit and to . \p. rii n.i- thi stimulus and | rofil derivable 

 from the meetings chiefly.il must be admitted, outside 

 the section-rooms. 'The British Assoi .1- re- 

 vitalising, and I believe it can I., revitalised If our 

 men of science would rally to it, it mighi do' much 

 thai -.1111- ■ neglected or to be falling into 

 the hands of new organisations, the numbe 1 1 which 



alone, to say nothing of their particular distim 



or iheii -iil.-rripn.iM-, is becoming quite bewildering. . 



Ii i-, of course, the British way to have a multi- 

 of disconnected organisations doing, or trying 

 to do, much tin -am.' thing. We have won the war 

 lit is true some others "also ran"), an. 1 Britain is 

 justified in her institutions. To that no one subscribes 

 more heartily than I, Inn we made some mistake-; 

 and though organisation in the German wa) ma] bi 

 the mental path to inhumanity if followed far, I think 

 we mighl piofii in using a little mon co-operation as 

 u 1 go mil -■ \ eral ways. 



Chemistry, it has been said, i- a French science. 

 He thai a- it may, the immortal Lavoisier, who did 

 more than anyone to revolutionise chemistry, began 

 to investigate combustion because Ii.. was interested 

 in lighting the streets of Paris. So at least sa\s M. 

 I.e Chatelier, who is, I think, a chemist asses pur. 

 According to my reading of history, so much pure 

 science has arisen, nol from the heavens above, hut 

 from the earth earthy beneath^ that I will never, if I 

 can help il, be penned" off bv any principality or power 

 from the fraternity of applied science. Besides that, I 

 owe them personally more than can ever be acknow- 

 ledged for heading me off certain great dangers that 

 threaten the academic life, and for helping me in count- 

 ies- ways with the promotion of pure science. We 

 may rejoice without reserve in their temporary mono- 

 poly of popular favour. Arthur Smitheli.s. 



The Theory of Hormones Applied to Plants. 



\ii one would have read Prof. Bayliss's review 

 (Xaurr of December 12, p. 285) of Dr. Jacques 

 Loeb's experiments on the "chemical correlationship " 



in plant growth with greater interest than John 

 Hunter, for he had carried out many experiments on 

 growing beans to elucidate the phenomena which are 

 now explained on the theory of hormones. Hunter 

 was familiar with phenomena of a similar kind in 

 animals, and his experiments on plants were made 

 primarily to elucidate that mysterious mechanism 

 which went in Hunter's time under the name of " sym- 

 pathy." An account of Hunter'- experiments, carried 

 out between 1772 and 1790, will he found in " K— a\ - 

 and Observations by John Hunter," edited by Sir 

 Richard Owen, and published in 1861 (vol. i., p. 367). 

 Thesi observations were saved from destruction by 

 William Clift. Arthur Keith. 



College of Surgeons, London. W.C. 



RESEARCH ISSOCIATIONS AND OTHERS. 



RESEARCH is the cry in every direction, bul 

 the public -till needs instruction as to what 



it means and the conditions requisite for progress. 

 Discovery "t new principles mi which advance 

 can be made in the fundamental knowledge "I 

 Nature will probably be accomplished in the future, 

 as in the past, through the g;enius of tin leu 

 gifted men, but the dissemination of the right 

 i nl 1.1 I nowledge and the creation of a widely 



