December 2, 1909] 



NA TURE 



127 



LETTERS TO THE EDITOR. 



[The Editor does not hold himself responsible for opinions 

 expressed by his correspondents. Neither can he undertake 

 to 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.] 



A New Ocea ographical Expedition. 

 In Nature of November iS (p. 71) there is a notice of 

 a new oceanographical expedition, to be undertaken by the 

 Norwegians in their surveying vessel Michael Sars, on the 

 suggestion of Sir John Murray, and mainly at his expense. 

 It is very gratifying to meet with cooperation of this Icind 

 in the prosecution of deep-sea research, and the investiga- 

 tion of the portion of the North Atlantic contemplated in 

 the programme cannot fail to furnish interesting and useful 

 results. 



In the account of the e.xpedition I note the following 

 passage : — " The application of methods of high precision 

 £0 the determination of the temperature and salinity of 

 sea-water has yielded results which have raised consider- 

 able doubt in the minds of some investigators as to the 

 validity of the earlier observations made by the Challenger 

 and other expeditions, and the cruise of the Michael Sars 

 should not only afford much entirely new information, but 

 provide a means of valuing the earlier work." 



.'\s chemist and physicist of the Challenger expedition, I 

 feel that this is a reflection, not only on the name of 

 Challenger, but also on myself. I was a professional 

 chemist of recognised standing at the date when the expedi- 

 tion was planned, and it was to this fact that I owed my 

 selection for the post nearly a year before the ship sailed. 

 During the whole of this time I was occupied with the 

 study of the work to be done and of the methods to be 

 employed in doing it. Some of these were devised by 

 myself, and none were approved before they had been 

 thoroughly tested on land ; nor were they finally accepted 

 until they had passed the probation of the first three 

 months at sea. The regular work of the expedition began 

 \vilh the sailing of the ship from TenerifTe on February 

 ■S- '873- By this time the scheme of the routine work 

 of my department had taken definite shape, and it suffered 

 but little alteration during the cruise. .\\[ the actual work 

 ^.vas done by myself, and no method was employed which 

 I had not myself tested and found to give, in my hands, 

 thoroughly trustworthy results. 



I think it is due to me and to the readers of Nature 

 that the investigators, in whose minds doubts have been 

 r.Tised as to the validity of the Challenger observations, 

 should state them, with the grounds on which they rest, 

 and also indicate how they expect the cruise of the Michael 

 Sars to provide a means of valuing the earlier work. 

 November 27. J. Y. Buchanan. 



Gametogenebis of the Sawfly Nematiis rihesii. A 

 Correction. 



Ix the Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science^ vol. 

 li., 1907, p. loi, I described observations on the gameto- 

 genesis of Nematus ribesii, some of which subsequent work 

 has shown to be erroneous. Since my statements have been 

 quoted in several recent papers, I think it necessary to 

 correct the mistalies as far as possible, although I have 

 not yet reached a satisfactory solution of the phenomena, 

 ihe errors arose partly through misinterpretation of the 

 phenomena observed anil partly through imperfect fixation, 

 for 1 find that, unless the material is very accurately fi.xed, 

 the chromosomes tend to adhere together and give, the 

 r.ppearance of a smaller number than the true one. The 

 same cause has led other observers to make similar 

 mistakes. 



Re-investigation of Nematus shows, in the first place, that 

 there is only one division of the spermatocytes ; the first 

 division described in my paper is not a true mitosis, but is 

 probably comparable with the abortive division observed 

 in the spermatogenesis of the bee. I have not yet been 

 able to determine the chromosome number with certainty. 

 In the spermatogonia the number appears to be about 

 sixteen, and that in spermatocyte mitoses about eight, but 

 if eight is the true reduced number, the occurrence of 

 sixteen in the spermatogonial mitoses of larvse derived 

 from parthenogenetic eggs is unexplained. In the bee, and 

 NO. 2092, VOL. 82] 



as I find also in a Cynipid (.to be pubhshed shortly), the 

 spermatogonial number is the same as that of the 

 spermatocytes. 



I have not yet obtained fresh material for re-investigation 

 of the maturation of the egg, but the results of my recent 

 work on the spermatogenesis make it clear that my 

 observations on the chromosomes in the polar divisions also 

 require revision. 



But the behaviour of the chromosomes in Nematus 

 ribesii is so difficult to follow that it is possible that the 

 true interpretation will be obtained only by the discovery of 

 some nearly related species in which they are more clearly 

 distinguishable. Leonard Doncaster. 



University of Birmingham, November 27. 



Are the Senses evir Vicarious ? 



[Prof. McKendrick has sent us the subjoined letter 

 received by him, and his comments upon it.. — Ed. Nature.] 



My attention has just been directed to a letter which 

 appeared in Nature of March 11 (vol. Ixxx., p. 38). It was 

 signed by Prof. McKendrick, and dealt with the vexed 

 question of the blind and their faculties. 



I am a blind man, and have mixed with blind people 

 of all ages for the past thirty years. You will grant that 

 I ought to know something about the question you discuss 

 in your letter. 



Permit me to thank you for what you say about the 

 popular notion that when a person loses his sight he is 

 compensated by a gift of ability in one, if not all, his other 

 faculties. The intelligent blind know how foolish this idea 

 is, and constantly protest against it. The public, however, 

 insist upon its accuracy, and calmly assume that the blind 

 do not grasp the point at issue, or aflfirm that those who 

 protest are unbelievers in the goodness of God. This 

 assertion of compensation leads to all sorts of ridiculous 

 notions, and has a very pernicious practical effect. The 

 very people who assert the theory of compensation are 

 among the number who shrink from providing facilities for 

 the proper training and employment of the very gifted 

 people they profess to look upon as the possessors of special 

 talents. They impute to us the possession of all kinds of 

 striking abilities, yet they decline to allow the specially 

 talented to do what would earn or help to earn a 

 livelihood. We are credited with mavellous powers in 

 music, basket-making, &c., and yet when we assert our 

 claim to live the ordinary life of the citizen these people are 

 shocked at our audacity. 



Now, the overthrow of the theory that we are specially 

 compensated for the loss of sight will destroy the false 

 impressions regarding our wonderful memories and all the 

 other fantastic notions, and the way will be opened for 

 common-sense treatment of the training and employment 

 of the blind. It is notorious among the blind themselves 

 that numbers of them are not at all musical, and that 

 mechanical ability is not a conspicuous feature. Many 

 blind are very deficient in hearing, in smell, and in the 

 sense of touch itself. My own experience has compelled 

 me to take heed of the varying degrees of what I shall 

 call, for want of a better name, ear-power. The same 

 variety exists in touch-power and memory-power. I should 

 like to refer to these as well as many other interesting 

 phenomena, but I fear I must content myself with asking 

 your kindly attention to a problem which has baffled me for 

 more than twenty years. Why does the voice call up before 

 me the upper part of the speaker's face, and enable me to 

 form a picture of the expression of the speaker? The 

 expression of the eyes is frequently as vividly before me as 

 when I could see. When people are speaking to me, they 

 are never on guard to control their countenance as they 

 would be if conversing with a sighted person. I am thus 

 enabled to get a picture of the play of their emotions which 

 helps me to come to conclusions as to character, &c. The 

 lower part of the face was only once made visible to me, 

 so that I could feel sure about it. I know when a person 

 smiles, frowns, when the face lights up with an intelligence 

 or when apathy and want of perception cloud the counten- 

 ance. Sometimes I can follow the line of the glance and 

 can point out where it would strike. When listening to 

 public speakers I like to sit at an angle to them, and not in 

 front. Can you point to anything that will aid me to come 

 to a sensible conclusion on this matter of the voice convey- 



