622 



SCIENCE 



[Vol. LVI, No. 1457 



dispensed for research. It should be plain 

 from fchis itihat the democratic or representa- 

 tive character of the council, designed, as it 

 was, to expi^ess the combined judgment of 

 scientific workers, is not in a,ny way impaired 

 by the function of making "grants" or select- 

 ing a list of "beneficiaries." 



If the council is ever to become a dispenser 

 of funds, the change would no doubt come 

 about thi-ough such a growth of confidence in 

 its work that much larger donations would be 

 made with less and less question as to their 

 use. It is not impossible that this will occur, 

 but the indications that point that way do not 

 affect our division and need not be mentioned 

 here. 



As the great question before the geologists 

 of our country is the use which they can make 

 of their own division, and as the possibility of 

 raising money is often a part of that question, 

 it will be wise to examine briefly the sources 

 of the support thus far obtained for other pur- 

 poses. The several scientific divisions differ 

 enormouslj' in the financial support which they 

 have been able to command. Should this dif- 

 ference be regarded as a measure of efflciency 

 or merely -as an indication of difference in 

 method? Ought Geology and Geography with 

 equal leadership and diligence to have cap- 

 tured tlieir "share" of the more than half a 

 million dollars donated for Physics and Chem- 

 istry, or of the like amount given to Medi- 

 cine? These questions may not be answered 

 positively, hut it will help some if we inquire 

 what relation the donors have iborne to the ob- 

 jeots of their donations. In other words — 

 What has been the nature of the "appeal" in 

 each case? When we have finished this anal- 

 ysis we may ask whether G«ology should be 

 going to its friends with siorilar appeals. 



The largest donations have come from cor- 

 porations holding large trust funds whose 

 income must he distributed. Each one of these 

 corporations specializes more or less in certain 

 fields of science and generally elects to make 

 its donations in fields related to its central 

 interest. Thus the Rockefeller Foundation is 

 known to be interested in Medicine and its con- 

 tributory sciences. In addition to the five mil- 



lion dollars given by the Carnegie Corporation 

 for endowment and building, well over a mil- 

 lion dollars have been pledged for research by 

 various trusts of similar character. 



Another large class of donations, aggi-e- 

 gating to date a few hundred thousand dollars, 

 have had for their object some improvement of 

 technique of manufacture or other ultimate ad- 

 vantage in production. The donors to such 

 projects generally represent commercial inter- 

 ests in the corresponding fields of industry. 

 The researches subsidized are of fundamental 

 character but their relation to industry or trade 

 is sufficiently patent to afford a strong appeal 

 to producers. Examples of this class are 

 found in the donations for the Critical Tables 

 of Physical and Chemical Constants and in the 

 support of the Crop Protection Eellowships. 

 A slightly different appeal, looking toward 

 preservation rather than production, is found 

 in the support of the Marine Piling Investiga- 

 tion. 



A smaller amount must be credited to pure 

 philanthropy or public spirit. In these cases 

 the donor can hope for no return in the way 

 of personal profit, as when a great retail mer- 

 chant gives the money for a biological fellow- 

 ship. While less than one hundred thousand 

 dollars given directly to scientific work comes 

 under this classification, it is fair to mention 

 the one hundred and eighty-five thousand dol- 

 lars contributed by twenty friends to purchase 

 the site for the building. ' 



Lastly, a few thousand dollars have been 

 contributed by stat^ toward cooperative re- 

 searches, such as reforestation and highway 

 pi-oblems. The appeal here is for state aid in 

 what is properly a state function. 



With this classification of donors and ap- 

 peals before us, geologists should be able to 

 run down the list and form some idea whether 

 their science is in position to make effective 

 appeals for money. The list of great trusts is 

 not long and the general field that each one 

 favors is known. G«ology is by no means ex- 

 cluded from their interests (recall, e.g., the 

 Carnegie Corporation and the Shaler Memorial 

 Fund) but in no case is it likely that the 

 National Research Council would be asked to 



