JUNE 19, 1902] 
Now, according to Legendre, the perimeter in this case is 
2m(-90277992), so that the rule gives the desired result correct 
to within one hundred-millionth of 27. THOMAS MulIR. 
Cape Town, South Africa, May 19. 
The ‘‘Armorl” Electro-Capillary Relay. 
IN reply to your correspondent ‘‘J.-S. ” (p. 151), I may say 
that the model which I saw did actually work ; it illustrated the 
flow of mercury from a fine jet when subjected to the influence of 
a small electromotive force, in the same way as described with 
reference to Fig. 1 of my article. I think your correspondent 
slightly misunderstands the principle of the instrument; it is 
not the small movement of the mercury, such as is used in the 
ordinary capillary electrometer, which works the relay lever ; 
this movement merely serves to force some of the mercury out 
of the jet, and the fading mercury then moves the lever. — 
The inventors claimed that they had succeeded in effecting so 
nice a balance of forces that the mercury flowed from the jet 
under a very small influence. I join with your correspondent 
in the desire (which I expressed also in my article) that some 
trustworthy data concerning the instrument should be published. 
June 13. THe WRITER OF THE ARTICLE. 
SCIENCE AND MILITARY EDUCATION. 
Gree report of the Military Education Committee was 
issued to the public on Saturday, June 7, and 
has been the subject of much comment in the Press. 
The conclusions and recommendations of the Committee 
have been well. received on the whole, though there are 
some exceptions, as in the case of the Sfectator, which 
would wish to see Sandhurst done away with, or rather 
used in an entirely different manner and at a later stage 
in the officer’s career, and in that of the military corre- 
spondent of the Z7es, who, in the course of a long 
article, falls foul of an important passage relating to 
science, and in effect advises the War Office not to 
accept or act upon the recommendations of the Com- 
mittee on this subject. The writer of the article goes so 
far, indeed, as to suggest that the Committee has not 
sufficiently considered the evidence, quoting Sir George 
Clarke in support of the merits of Latin in such a way 
that we were not a little surprised on turning to Sir 
George’s evidence to find that, when questioned as to 
the proper preliminary training of cadets (Question 839), 
he expressed the opinion that they should have a “ broad, 
liberal education,” adding that “the broader it is and the 
wider its scope, and the sounder generally, the better it 
will fit them for the special training they receive after- 
wards.” 
The passage objected to by the 7zes correspondent 
(20) will be found on p. 5, and, appearing as it does over 
the signatures of two such eminent representatives of 
classical training as the head masters of Eton and St. 
Paul’s, is so important that we print it in full. It is as 
follows :— 
“The fifth subject which may be considered as an 
essential part of a sound general education is experi- 
mental science, that is to say, the science of physics and 
chemistry treated experimentally. As a means of mental 
training, and also viewed as useful knowledge, this may 
be considered a necessary part of the intellectual equip- 
ment of every educated man, and especially so of the 
officer, whose profession in all its branches is daily be- 
coming more and more dependent on science.” 
Considering the uncompromising terms of this state- 
ment, it is disappointing to find that a committee holding 
such clear and strong views should have found itself, in 
the event, unable to agree upon a scheme which would 
ensure that this “‘necessary part of the intellectual 
equipment of every educated man” should be provided 
for each and all our future officers. For it cannot be 
denied that the actual position proposed for science in the 
scheme recommended, viz. that it should be alternative 
NO. 1703, VOL. 66] 
NATURE 
175 
in Class I. with Latin, will put it in the power of 
opponents of science to prevent candidates who may 
come under their influence from having the opportunity 
of securing this ‘essential part of a sound general 
education.” 
In saying this we do not overlook the fact, as some 
are disposed to do, that the proposed arrangements will 
allow those who select Latin as their subject in Class I. 
to offer science as a Class II. subject, and that, conse- 
quently, neither of these two necessary subjects need be 
neglected. But after making all allowance for the 
manner in which the scheme as a whole will qualify the 
effect of the relations of Latin and science in Class I., we 
think the Committee has not sufficiently regarded the 
fact that as Latin is begun at a very early age, but 
chemistry and physics much later, candidates choosing 
their subjects at about fifteen, as many, and perhaps 
most, of them must do, will-be much more likely to 
select the former than the latter from Class I. (see Ques- 
tions 8630, 8631, 8632), leaving science for Group II., 
where, however, it becomes an alternative with several 
other subjects, and so is very likely to be squeezed out. 
It is a striking illustration of the effects of the 
neglect of science in our educational system, which 
even now is being remedied but slowly in some of 
our schools, that so many soldiers and others still 
make the mistake of supposing that as regards 
science the Army only needs ‘‘a proportion of scientific 
experts among military officers for suggesting and 
following up improvements in madériel,’? and that 
“the majority of such experts can be better obtained 
from civilian sources outside the Army than from within 
its ranks.” The last part of this statement is, indeed, in 
spite of all the fine qualities of our officers, only too sadly 
true. But it is just because the basis of military educa- 
tion (and indeed of nearly all English education in the 
case of the abler members of the higher classes) has been 
too narrow in the past that the Army has failed to throw 
up a sufficient supply, we will not say of trained scientific 
specialists, but of officers capable of understanding the 
specialists, of absorbing their ideas, mastering their 
methods and applying these in the operations of war. 
How can we expect average men whose training has been 
mainly in language and mathematics to be resourceful 
and confident when brought face to face with the problems 
created for their profession by the revolutions of the last 
half century ? Every question, said Liebig, one of the 
creators of much that is strongest in modern Germany, 
put to science clearly and definitely has been satis- 
factorily answered before long. Only when the inquirer 
has no precise idea of the problem to be solved does 
he remain unsatisfied for long. It is just because the 
majority of our officers have not had the broadest training 
possible, that so many are unable to make use of the 
new powers that science holds out to them, and are still 
under the mistaken impression that the main use of 
science in education lies in the facts which it provides. 
It is clear that even now many educators and soldiers 
have not grasped the real elements of this great problem, 
and that they still fail to see that the object with which 
science is now taught is, not to convey a few more 
facts or a few facts of a new kind, but to preserve those 
habits of mind and that fertility of resource which daily 
become more important in face of the problems of 
modern life, and which are not to be gained by a purely 
literary and mathematical training. All will agree that 
faculties which must especially be cultivated in our 
officers “are power of command, habits of leadership, 
and the ability to act decisively and correctly at the 
right time and place.” But when it is contended, as it 
oftenis, that “study in a chemical laboratory does not make 
for this kind of fitness,” it is forgotten that laboratory 
work properly done will certainly develop these qualities 
at least as well, and probably better, than any study in 
