270 ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 1919. 
men and women of the country is so great, are out of sympathy 
with the government organization that is attempting to quicken the 
interest of the people in a particular branch of science. Moreover, 
itis vital to such an organization that it should attract to its service 
young men of exceptional ability in science. This it is not likely 
to do if professors of geology feel that they must conscientiously 
advise their most promising graduates to avoid government service. 
Doubtless some teachers of geology in the universities fail to realize 
the necessity for some of the compromises inevitable in a govern- 
ment bureau or in their impatience at some of the stupidities of 
bureaucratic procedure are inclined to place the blame for these 
where it does not belong; a few may cherish personal grievances. 
No class of men is without its unreasonable members, and neither 
rectitude nor tact can prevent occasional clashes; but if a national 
geological survey can not command the respect and hearty support 
of most of the geological faculties of the universities the con- 
sequences to the progress of geology must be deplorable. Any ap- 
proach to such a condition demands immediate action, with less 
emphasis on the question, “ Who is to blame? ” for in all probability 
there may be some fault on both sides, than on “ What can be done 
to restore relations of mutual regard and helpfulness?” 
THE AMATEUR IN GHOLOGY. 
In the present age of specialization we are apt to forget how much 
geology owes to amateurs, particularly in Britain and France. Sir 
Archibald Geikie in the concluding chapter of his Founders of 
Geology dwells particularly on this debt. He says: 
In the account which has been presented in this yolume of the work of some 
of the more notable men who have created the science of geology, one or two 
leading facts stand out prominently before us. In the first place, even in the 
list of selected names which we have considered, it is remarkable how varied 
have been the ordinary avocations * of these pioneers. The majority have been 
men engaged in other pursuits, who have devoted their leisure to the cultivation 
of geological studies. Steno, Guettard, Pallas, Ftichsel, and many more were 
physicians, either led by their medical training to interest themselves in natural 
history, or not seldom, even from boyhood, so fond of natural history as to 
choose medicine as their profession because of its affinities with that branch 
of science. Giraud-Soulavie and Michell were clergymen. Murchison was a 
retired soldier. Alexandre Brongniart was at first engaged in superintending 
the porcelain manufactory of Sévres.. Demarest was a hard-worked civil serv- 
ant who snatched his intervals for geology from the toils of incessant official 
occupation. William Smith found time for his researches in the midst of all 
the cares and anxieties of his profession as an engineer and surveyor. Hutton, 
Hall, DeSaussure., Von Buch, Lyell, and Darwin were men of means, who. 
scorned a life of slothful ease, and dedicated themselves and their fortunes to 
the study of the history of the earth. Playfair and Cuvier were both teachers 
3“ Vocations ’’ would seem to be the right word here. F, L. R. 
