FEBRUARY 1, 1901.] 
for a few years only, but apparently it has been 
known for along timein Japan. In order to 
settle the question whether the rusts affecting 
other Compositae might give rise to that on the 
chrysanthemum, Dr. Arthur made many cul- 
tures of the rusts on this and other related 
plants. He found that he could not infect 
other Compositae with the uredospores of chrys- 
anthemum rust, nor could he infect chrysanthe- 
mum with the uredospores of the rusts of other 
Compositae. No teleutospores have yet been 
observed in this country or Europe, and this 
fact is likely to make the disease more easily 
controllable. Hand-picking the diseased leaves, 
and spraying with Bordeaux Mixture or sul- 
phide of potassium are recommended. 
CHARLES HE. BESSEY. 
THE UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA. 
THE NATIONAL OBSERVATORY QUESTION. 
THE introduction by Senator Morgan last 
week of a bill to organize the National Obser- 
vatory of the United States, of which we have 
not yet seen a copy, and a letter from Professor 
Bigelow which we published last week, suggest 
a condensed statement of the points at issue. 
The grounds taken by SCIENCE are these: 
1. The United States, like every other lead- 
ing government of the world, should have a 
national astronomical observatory. 
2. The special object of this observatory 
should be to make those observations and cal- 
culations on the courses of the stars which are 
useful in the world’s progress, and require to 
be pursued with greater system and persistence 
than is possible in any but a national establish- 
ment. 
3. This purpose requires that the observatory 
should have a well understood and well defined 
policy and plan of work, mapped out by the 
best scientific authorities at command of the 
nation and obligatory on the scientific staff. 
4. No work but the best should be done; of 
-second-class work an abundance may be had 
SOLENCE. 
195 
everywhere. This requires that the instruments 
should be of the best. 
5. To attain these purposes it is necessary 
that the head of the observatory be an expe- 
This because of the high 
technical skill and experience required in plan- 
rienced astronomer. 
ning the work, in seeing that the innumerable 
details necessary to its excellence are attended 
to, and in so expending the funds of the obser- 
vatory as to get the best results, and also to in_ 
spire the confidence of the scientific public in 
the high quality of the work. 
Every effort on the part of our astronomers 
to get an observatory of this kind established 
has been defeated through the impression that 
we already have one which answers the pur- 
pose. In the opinion of every astronomer who 
has publicly expressed views on the subject this 
is not the case. So far as we are able to col- 
lect published views, while there may be much 
disagreement on side issues, there is absolute 
unanimity that the existing observatory fails to 
perform the required functions in a satisfactory 
way. Yet, we are quite ready to regard the 
question as an open one until everything that 
can be said in favor of the work and results of 
the existing observatory is brought out. If 
there is a single astronomer in the land who, 
after a careful examination of the published 
volumes of the observatory, draws the conclu- 
sion that the objects in question have been sat- 
isfactorily gained, or, after having read the an- 
nual reports of the past five years, concludes 
that they describe the class and character of 
work which should be expected from the most 
expensively supported astronomical observatory 
in the world, the columns of SCIENCE are cor- 
dially thrown open to him to make known his 
views, and the facts on which those views are 
based. 
It is a well-known fact that our existing ob- 
servatory is unique in the main feature of its 
