May 8, 1914] 



SCIENCE 



689 



well be regarded as evidence of a single Men- 

 ■delizing factor, quantitatively variable. 



If we set out by assuming that a Mendelian 

 factor is invariable, tben we are forced to 

 assume, whenever genetic variation is observed 

 in an organism, that this is due to an addi- 

 tional Mendelian factor. This is the real basis 

 of the multiple factor hypothesis as applied 

 to size inheritance, though not, of course, the 

 historical one. But to reason thus is merely 

 to pile one assumption upon another, which is 

 aot to advance science, whatever it does for 

 a system or a terminology; but with these we 

 -are less concerned than with knowing the 

 exact truth and in stating it as clearly and 

 ■concisely as possible. 



What now of human skin color, is this or is 

 it not Mendelian in inheritance? At present 

 I consider this largely a question of terminol- 

 ogy. The facts appear to be very similar to 

 those observed for body-size in rabbits, and 

 for other quantitative characters in animals 

 and plants. F^ is intermediate; F, is also 

 intermediate, but more variable than Fj. If 

 we call this Mendelism, we shall need to ex- 

 plain that it is not the Mendelism of Mendel 

 himself, but original Mendelism ■plus (1) the 

 assumption of gametic purity, plus (2) the 

 assumption of factorial constancy, plus (3) 

 the assumption of factorial multiplicity. 



W. E. Castle 



BussEY Institution, 

 Forest Hills, Mass., 

 April 15, 1914 



JAVEL WATER — A SIMPLIFIED AND CORRECTED 

 SPELLING 



In his " Grand dictionnaire universel du 

 XIXe Siecle" (Paris, 1873), Pierre Larousse 

 tells us that there used to stand upon the 

 banks of the Seine in the suburbs of Paris 

 in what is now the " XVe arrondissement " a 

 solitary mill, sheltered by trees, where bathers 

 and fishermen used to rest and partake of re- 

 freshments. This mill was known as the 

 " moulin de Javel " and the lexicographer else- 

 where states that this word is a variant of 

 javeau, which means an island of sand and 

 mud, a sandbank, although in this instance 



it is no doubt a proper name. The word 

 javelle (cf. English, provincial, gavel), signi- 

 fying an unbound sheaf or a bundle of grain 

 smaller than a sheaf, is of different origin. 



Upon the site of the old mill the village of 

 Javel was founded in 1777 by the Count of 

 Artois, who established a chemical works. 

 The first directors of the works, Messrs. Alban 

 and Vallet, were the originators of Javel 

 water, which they prepared in 1792 by passing 

 a current of chlorine through a solution of 

 2.440 kilos of " sub-carbonate " of potassium 

 in 17 kilos of water. Larousse also refers 

 explicitly to the erroneous spelling eau de 

 javelle, employed by some authors. Littre in 

 his " Dictionnaire de la langue frangaise " 

 (Paris, 1873) employs this erroneous spelling. 



Unfortunately, the dictionary of the French 

 Academy (7th edition, Paris, 1878) sanctioned 

 the spelling " Javelle " for both the name of 

 the mill and the derived name of the bleach- 

 ing liquor, adding error to error in describing 

 the liquid as a solution of potassium chloride 

 in water (" L'eau de javelle est du chlorure 

 de potassium en dissolution dans l'eau"). 



With such authority behind it, it is not 

 surprising that the -elle ending has come into 

 very general use. Yet a number of the more 

 careful French and English writers employ 

 the correct form of the word. Among such 

 are Girard in " La grande encyclopedic " 

 (article " Chlorures decolorants ") ; Emile 

 Bouant in his " Dictionnaire de chimie " 

 (Paris, 1888) ; Moissan in his " Chimie min- 

 erale " (1904^6) ; Edmund Knecht in the Ency- 

 clopedia Britannica, eleventh edition (article 

 " Bleaching ") ; and Sir Edward Thorpe in 

 his " Dictionary of Applied Chemistry " 

 (1912). In Germany and America, as far as 

 I have observed, the erroneous spelling is uni- 

 versally adopted. And our dictionaries of the 

 English language appear likewise to be unani- 

 mously wrong. Not even the New Standard 

 Dictionary (1913), which gives the simplified 

 spellings of the Carnegie board, makes the 

 least reference to the shorter form of this 

 word. 



A certain amount of confusion is prevalent 

 also regarding the signification of the term 



