200 NATURE 
[JUNE 26, 1902 
Tuesday, June 17. A number of influential members of 
the Institution were present, including Mr. J. Swinburne 
(president), Lord Kelvin, Prof. J. Perry, Prof. S. P. 
Thompson, Colonel R. E. Crompton and Mr. S. Z. de 
Ferranti. 
Lord Kelvin having introduced the deputation, Mr. 
Swinburne gave a clear statement of the case. He 
pointed out that local authorities had become involved in 
electrical enterprise through what was in reality only an 
accident, namely, that the laying of mains involved 
opening up the streets. As a result they had obtained 
legal powers which were not always used properly or in 
the interests of the community. Even a municipality 
acting in the true interests of its own ratepayers need 
not necessarily be doing what was best for the country at 
large. It was, moreover, now possible to carry out 
electrical undertakings on a scale that was not con- 
templated when the Acts by which they are governed (the 
Electric Lighting Acts of 1882-1888 and the Tramways 
Act of 1870) were passed. They urged, therefore, that 
the whole question of electrical legislation should be 
reconsidered by the Government with special reference 
to the right and advisability of allowing the municipalities 
to retain their present powers. ‘This question concerned 
the Government as a whole, but there was also a matter 
concerning the Board of Trade in particular. It was 
thought that there should be a larger electrical staff to 
enable the Board of Trade to deal more satisfactorily 
with modern developments. Many of the regulations 
were behindhand, and it was thought desirable that some 
questions, such as the use of overhead wires, the size of 
transformers, &c., should be reopened. 
Other speakers followed, including Colonel Crompton, 
who cited the case of Hove as one in which the Corpora- 
tion had done its best to thwart the efforts of the 
company which was supplying electric light. Mr. 
Ferranti laid stress on the desirability of allowing the 
use of overheadwires so that the capital expenditure of 
pioneering schemes might be diminished, and urged 
greater flexibility in the Board of Trade regulations gener- 
ally. It was finally agreed that the Institution of Electrical 
Engineers should go through the regulations and make 
recommendations to the Board of Trade on the points 
which electricians consider require amendment. 
Mr. Gerald Balfour, in replying on the main question, 
admitted England’s backwardness, but doubted whether 
it was entirely, or even chiefly, due to the cause alleged. 
We had to contend in England with the conservatism 
of strongly developed interests. He did not question, 
however, that the existing legislation was capable of 
amendment, and two Bills had already been drafted, one | 
dealing with electric traction and the other with electric | 
lighting. The Traction Bill was to give effect to the 
recommendations of the departmental committee ap- 
pointed by the Board of Trade, and he hoped it would 
prove a satisfactory compromise between the wishes of 
promoters and municipalities. The Lighting Bill was 
based on the recommendations of the House of Commons 
Committee of 1898, which advised considerable modifica- 
tions of the existing laws. He could not, however, hold 
out any hope of either Bill being passed this session. 
Mr. Swinburne asked that the whole question might be 
considered by a Royal Commission, and Mr. Balfour 
replied that he would be willing to consult the Cabinet, 
but could not say, without further consideration, whether 
he should recommend the suggestion to be adopted. 
_ It need scarcely be said that this promise is quite 
insufficient to satisfy the urgency of the case. Indeed, 
the spirit of the reply to the deputation is not what 
should inspire statesmen who desire to encourage national 
progress. It is conceded that the obstacles to electrical 
development in this country are serious, and that they 
prevent our electrical engineers from keeping the nation 
in the forefront of progress. The obvious duty of an 
NO. 1704, VOL. 66] 
enlightened Government is to insist that difficulties in 
the way of industrial advances must be removed ; or, at 
any rate, encouragement should be given to those who 
have to overcome them. Instead of this, our statesmen 
find excuses for the barriers across the road, and are 
eager to show reason why no attempt should be made to 
break them down. 
Such justification as Mr. Gerald Balfour gave for 
masterly inactivity is almost sufficient to make anyone 
abandon hope that departmental officials will ever 
understand the needs of science and technical industries. 
What do they know of progress whose only desire is not 
to interfere with vested interests ? Any advances that are 
made in England are due to the restless men who have 
in them the spirit of evolution and who force develop- 
ment in spite of unsympathetic circumstances. But we 
cannot hope to keep in line with other progressive 
nations unless the conditions for improvement are made 
more favourable. In commenting upon the apathetic 
spirit in which Mr. Gerald Balfour met the deputation, the 
Times referred to our leeway in electrical industries and 
expressed the views of many thoughtful men as to the 
need of making it up. The remarks are worth repro- 
duction here, because they show that the position taken 
by ‘the Government is one from which the interests of 
science and industry cannot be seen. 
It is not] merely by America that we have been completely 
beaten in electrical engineering. We are -far behind continental 
countries as old as ourselves and having quite as many vested 
interests to deal with. The reason is that every continental 
Government keeps in touch with the best knowledge of the day, 
and habitually consults, upon every question involving the ap- 
plication of science, the highest scientific authorities it can find. 
Had the Government of this country learned to take that course 
the position of the nation at this moment would be incalculably 
better than it is. When it was suggested to Mr. Gerald Balfour 
that his Board of Trade electrical staff is not adequate for the 
duties thrown upon it, he was apparently unable to grasp the 
meaning of the criticism. What is meant is that, instead of 
relying upon inspectors who from the nature of the case were 
not originally the foremost men in electrical engineering, and 
who, again from the nature of the case, are not the men most 
abreast of the developments achieved since their appointment, 
the Board of Trade should be guided by the advice of the real 
experts and pioneers who are actually doing the things which 
its official experts can only criticise from their bureaucratically 
narrow standpoint. 
This nation really has no chance in modern conditions unless 
official persons generally consent to recognise that there are a 
great many important subjects about which they know nothing, 
and which are in a state of such rapid change and development 
that no student, of the calibre which an official salary will attract, 
can possibly be and remain in a position to legislate about them. 
What we want is that the real practical and scientific intellect of 
the country should be called to the aid of the politicians and 
their official ‘‘ experts.” It is not by Boards of Trade, with 
their self-sufficiency, their timidity and their necessary ignorance 
of the later phases of development, that other nations have 
adapted their legislation to the progress of science. It is by 
giving intellect that advisory place in the framing of legislation 
which it will never seek by the politician’s method of appealing 
to the ballot-box. The electrical, chemical, physical and 
biological questions, upon the solution of which so much 
modern progress and prosperity depend, deserve and demand 
the habitual consultation of the best men engaged in their 
study. 
Men of science and leaders of industrial development 
are familiar with these opinions, and it is time that our 
statesmen regarded national needs from the same point 
of view. Unless this is realised the nation cannot hold 
its position in the industrial wars of the world. The 
Duke of Devonshire’s Commission many years ago gave 
a warning that continued neglect of scientific and 
technical interests by the Government must lead to 
disaster, and we have persistently called for reform to 
prevent the loss that must come unless the views of our 
