September 24, 1909] 



SCIENCE 



405 



Zurich. Later he spent a year in Cambridge 

 with Professor J. J. Thomson. His courses 

 at the University of Illinois will be in theoret- 

 ical physics. 



The following are the new appointments in 

 the scientific departments of the University of 

 Kansas: Frederick E. Kester, professor of 

 physics and head of the department; George 

 C. Shaad, professor of electrical engineering 

 and head of the department; Harry Gardner, 

 assistant professor of sanitary engineering 

 Roy L. Moodie, assistant professor in zoology 

 Wilheknina Bauer, instructor in mathe 

 matics; Jas. T. Bowles, instructor in pharm 

 acy; H. J. Broderson, instructor in chemistry 

 Paul V. Faragher, instructor in chemistry 

 Arthur B. Frizell, instructor in mathematics 

 Meyer Gaba, instructor in mathematics 

 Florence Hedger, instructor in chemistry 

 Chester A. Johnson, instructor in phys 

 ics; Xadine Nowlin, instructor in zoology 

 Howard A. Parker, instructor in civil engi- 

 neering; George N. Watson, instructor in 

 pharmacy; Paul Wernicke, instructor in 

 mathematics; Bert C. Frichot, laboratory as- 

 sistant in chemistry; Clifford P. Johnson, as- 

 sistant instructor in physiology; C. A. Nash, 

 assistant instructor in chemistry; E. R. 

 Weidlein, assistant instructor in chemistry; 

 Edward Wiedemann, assistant instructor in 

 bacteriology. 



A CHAIR of physical chemistry and metal- 

 lurgy has been established at Frankfort to 

 which Dr. Lorenz, of Zurich, has been called. 



DISCUSSION A\D CORRESPONDENCE 

 THE COUNTRY BOY 



In Science for July 2 Dr. Frederick Adams 

 Woods replies to my article of May 7. I am 

 very glad to learn from this article of Dr. 

 Woods that we are not so far apart as I had 

 suspected. I had thought that he claimed that 

 practically heredity had everything and en- 

 vironment very little indeed to do with the 

 development of character. Evidently I have 

 misunderstood him, for in the article in ques- 

 tion he indicates clearly that he believes that 

 environment may produce profound results in 

 character. Dr. Woods misinterprets part of 

 what I said, or at least he does not get the idea 



which I meant to convey. Perhaps the fault is 

 entirely my own. What I meant to say was 

 that the environment of royalty is such as to 

 give an opportunity for the full development 

 of the natural tendencies of the individual and, 

 therefore, in this class of people heredity will 

 more nearly account for intellectual ability and 

 moral character than it will in those classes of 

 society who do not live under an environment 

 that will give full opportunity for the develop- 

 ment of the natural bent of the individual. 



Since the publication of my last article I 

 have been able to collect some data which is 

 of interest in connection with the effect of 

 farm life on the growing boy, and while these 

 data are meager they seem to me to be favor- 

 able to the assumption that if other things 

 could be equalized the life of the farm has a 

 very distinct educational value. Dr. Woods 

 has shown that at the time when the average 

 man noted in " Who's Who " was a boy, about 

 16 per cent, of our population lived in the 

 cities. He further showed that about 30 per 

 cent, of the individuals in " Who's Who " 

 were brought up in the city. He accounts for 

 this excess of city men amongst men of note 

 by the fact that the city attracts talent, the 

 percentage of ability in the city, therefore, 

 being greater than in the country. He would, 

 therefore, explain the excess of city men 

 mainly as the result of heredity. He may be 

 correct in this position. I am inclined at 

 present, however, to believe that while this 

 excess may be partly due to the fact that talent 

 is attracted to the city and that, therefore, the 

 city child has a better chance of inheriting 

 talent, part of it is due to the fact that the 

 cities in general have better school facilities 

 than the country. Most of the men in " Who's 

 Who " are those who had good educational 

 advantages. I suspect, therefore, that if an 

 adequate study were made we should find that 

 in this case environment has had something to 

 do with the fact that 30 per cent, of the men 

 in " Who's Who " are from the city. But for 

 the sake of argument let us accept Dr. Woods's 

 point of view. It would then follow that 30 

 per cent, of our leading men should be ac- 

 credited to the city if their leadership is due 

 entirely to heredity. Now for the facts in the 



