274 ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 1919, 
for this particular work; finally, it was argued that geologists could 
apply their knowledge of the field relations of ore deposits to improve 
the character of statistical reports and would themselves benefit by 
additional opportunities to visit and examine many deposits that 
they might not otherwise see. : 
It is undoubtedly true that the statistical reports of the United 
States Geological Survey have greatly improved in accuracy, 
fullness, and general interest since this plan was adopted. It is 
also true that some geologists have turned their opportunities as 
statistical experts to good account both in enlarging their experience 
and by gathering material that has been worked into geological 
papers. Nevertheless, the policy has, in my opinion, been a mistake 
both economically and scientifically. It has insidiously filched the 
time of highly trained men who have shown originality and capacity 
for geologic research and has tied these men down to comparatively 
easy and more or less routine tasks. Some geologists who were once 
scientifically productive no longer contribute anything to geological 
literature but are immersed in work that men without their special 
geological training could do as well. To a certain extent the policy 
is destructive of scientific morale. A young geologist sees that a man 
who publishes, annually or at shorter periods, reports on the sta- 
tistics of production of some metal becomes widely known to all 
interested in that metal and is considered by them as the United 
States Geological Survey’s principal expert on that metal. This 
easily won recognition, with all that it implies or seems to imply in 
the way of promotion and of industrial opportunity, must constitute 
a real temptation so long as a scientific man is expected to contribute 
his own enthusiastic devotion to science as part payment of his 
salary. The incidental geological opportunities offered by statistical 
work are found chiefly in connection with a few of the minor min- 
eral resources, rather than with such industrially dominant com- 
modities as petroleum, iron, or copper, and these opportunities for 
the individual geologist are soon exhausted and are likely to be pur- 
chased at a price far out of proportion to their value. The suppo- 
sition that geological training is essential for good statistical work 
in mineral products is a fallacy, and no man who shows promise of 
making real contributions to geologic science should be placed in 
such circumstances that he is virtually forced to worship an idol 
whose head may be of gold and precious stones but whose feet are as- 
suredly of clay. Iam emphatically of the opinion that the collection 
of mineral statistics is not logically a function of a national geo- 
logical survey. If, however, such a survey is committed to this task 
by law, by the lack of any other organization to do the work, or by 
well-considered reasons of policy, then it is even more certain that 
