JANUARY 21, 1904] 
NATURE 
269 
magnetic pole is declared to have moved about ¥8oo | 
miles in a north-westerly direction between 1600 and 
1780, then about 400 miles in a south-easterly direc- 
tion between 1780 and 1915. 
The remarkable results thus given in these charts 
can hardly be accepted until observation has done its 
worl: and provided a better basis of calculation than 
that at the disposal of their author. 
The Wonderful Works of God. Pages from the Book | 
of Nature. By J. Polkinghorn. Pp. iv+156; illus- 
trated. (London: Society for Promoting Christian 
Knowledge, 1903.) Price 2s. 
Tue purport of the book, it is said, is to awaken an | 
interest in the marvels of creation, and perhaps this | 
might have been done without the introduction of quite 
so many “ pious reflections.’’ Be this as it may, the 
author might at least have taken care that all his state- 
ments were up to date, and at the same time have 
avoided the introduction of misleading illustrations. 
As an example of the former failing, we may refer to 
the statements (p. 29) that sponges are included in the 
Ceelenterata, and (p. 94) that a few birds probably 
hibernate (vide A. Newton, ‘‘ Dictionary of Birds,’’ p. 
928). As regards the second point, we may direct 
attention to the figure on p. 29, in which the shell 
borne by a soldier-crab presents no resemblance to that 
of any mollusc with which we are acquainted. 
Although exception may be taken to the mode of treat- | 
ment, the purport of the book is deserving of all com- 
mcndation. 
Riviera Nature Notes. Second edition. 
(London: Bernard Quaritch, 1903.) 
Tuts volume will be a welcome addition to the library 
of everyone who is interested in the old-fashioned 
hobby of field natural history or its modern substitute 
of ‘‘ nature-study.’’ The first edition, which was pub- 
lished in 1898, was a delightful book, but it left much 
to be desired in the matter of paper, printing, illustra- 
tions, correction of misprints, and similar matters of 
general detail. In all these respects the present volume 
is quite a different book from its predecessor, and 
though a few misprints still survive, it is evident that 
no pains have been spared in producing a well printed 
book, the illustrations in which are quite works of 
art. The anonymous author states that he is a school- 
master by profession, and that the book was written 
as a recreation, and with no intent to produce a scien- 
tific treatise. But those who have visited the shores 
of the Mediterranean will know that the fauna, the 
flora, and the folklore of this region possess an in- 
dividuality of which no adequate impression can be 
conveyed by exact scientific descriptions, but of which 
a much better idea can be obtained from the descrip- 
tions and illustrations given by one who is evidently 
familiar with every nook and corner of the district. 
We cordially agree with the last words of the pre- 
Pp. xv+ 402. 
there are many recreations even less profitable than 
writing notes upon the Natural History of the | 
Riviera.” 
The Square Circled. By P. O. P. Pp. 44. (Edin- 
burgh: E. and S. Livingstone, 1903.) 
Many writers have given approximate geometrical 
constructions for straight lines equal in length to arcs 
of circles, and some of these are so simple that it seems 
a pity they are so rarely seen in text-books. This 
remark in no way applies to the constructions given 
in the present book. Most of the figures are very in- 
volved and complicated, containing between thirty and 
forty lines. If the methods really did lead to an exact 
and not merely an approximate construction for 
NO. 1786, VOL. 69] 
| curve 
squaring the circle, the use of ruler and compasses 
would introduce errors far greater than those which 
| would arise from taking even such a rough value for 
m as 37. It is a pity that the author before writing 
this book did not consult a mathematical friend. Had 
he done so he would have been told that his ‘‘ V-shaped 
” is a portion of a cycloid, and he would not 
have issued the book in its present form. 
The Garden Diary and Calendar of Nature. With 
Gardening Directions by Rose Kingsley and Pre- 
face by G. A. B. Dewar. Pp. x+ Diary. (London: 
George Allen, 1904.) 
A rewW nature and other notes, together with direc- 
tions as to the month’s work in the garden, precede 
the diary for each month. Every day throughout the 
year is provided with an appropriate poetical quotation 
and a space in which to record personal observations 
of nature in the garden and elsewhere. Altogether a 
pleasing compilation. 
LETTERS, TO THE EDITOR. 
{The Editor does not hold himself responsible for opinions 
expressed by his correspondents. Neither can he undertake 
lo return, or to correspond with the writers of, rejected 
manuscripts intended for this or any other part of NATURE. 
No notice is taken of anonymous communications. ] 
Oxford Science. 
To the report of a lecturé recently delivered in Oxford 
(Natur®&, vol. Ixix. p. 207) Prof. Perry appends a footnote 
in which he states that if he were to endow a professor- 
ship in some definite branch of science at Oxford, the 
authorities would appoint a man who never had done, and 
who never could be expected to do, any research work, and 
whose highest ambition would be to act zealously as the 
bursar of his college! As some of the readers of this re- 
port might regard this statement as being literally true, it 
is as well it should be contradicted. Of the fourteen full 
science professors at Oxford, only one is, or ever has been, 
a college bursar. In fact, nearly all the professors are 
eminent men, who by their research work have contributed 
in no small measure to the advancement of science. All 
are fellows of the Royal Society, and nearly all have served 
on its council. 
Prof. Perry’s statement that Oxford turns out very little 
research work of any kind is likewise unsupported by facts. 
As can be seen from the ‘* Reports of University Institu- 
tions ’’ (published by the Clarendon Press), the amount of 
research work done in Oxford is increasing every year. To 
take but a few instances, we find that, in 1902, workers in 
the department of physiology published eighteen original 
memoirs, those in the department of astronomy eleven, and 
those in the department of comparative anatomy ten 
memoirs, whilst from the Hope department of zoology two 
bulky volumes of collected researches have been published 
within the last few months. In fact, I challenge Prof. 
Perry to name a single professor, lecturer or demonstrator, 
| in the depart { physi 1c i Z 7 
face :—* But I may, perhaps, venture to plead that | in e departments of physiology, comparative anatomy, 
zoology, geology, botany, physics (electricity), astronomy or 
mineralogy, who is not engaged upon research at the pre- 
sent time, and who has not published original work during 
the last year or two. Again, many of the colleges are sub- 
| sidising research by electing research fellows rather than 
fellows by examination. Of such fellows—all elected within 
the last few years—it will suffice to mention the names of 
Messrs. Arthur Evans and D. G. Hogarth, whose explor- 
ation work in Crete is known to all, and Messrs. Grenfell 
and Hunt, equally well known for their work in Egypt. 
The statement that Oxford hates science does not seem 
to be borne out by the fact that, of the total yearly revenue 
of the university (as apart from the colleges), more than 
10,000l., or a seventh part of the whole, is devoted to the 
upkeep of the science departments and the payment of 
science readers and lecturers. Many of the colleges are no 
less liberal in their support of science and research. To 
