692 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XXIV. Ndf622. 



Professor A. A. Breneman, chairman of the 

 section, presented his opening address, which 

 was, in the main, an account of the history of 

 organization among chemists in America, with 

 remarks upon the present status of chemistry 

 as a profession. He described the origin of 

 the American Chemical Society and the 

 Chemists' Club and urged the importance of 

 maintaining a high standard of education 

 among chemists. 



Professor Winslow, of the biological depart- 

 ment of the Massachusetts Institute of Tech- 

 nology, spoke ' On the Disposal of City 

 Sewage.' Professor "Winslow presented the 

 prominent features of the development of 

 sewage treatment in a clear and comprehen- 

 sible manner, showing numerous slides to 

 illustrate the various types of sewage plants. 

 He indicated the research work now in prog- 

 ress at the Massachusetts Institute of Tech- 

 nology sewage experiment station and finally 

 spoke of the latest developments in the purifi- 

 cation of sewage, noting especially the trick- 

 ling system. 



The subject was supplemented by remarks 

 from Professor Pellew on an interesting 

 sewage problem in White Plains and by Dr. 

 Soper, who spoke of the coming need of puri- 

 fying sewage before dumping it into New 

 York Bay. C. M. Joyce, 



Secretary. 



DISCUSSION AND CORRESPONDENCE. 

 PRINCIPLES WHICH GOVERN THE UNITED STATES 

 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY IN ITS RELATIONS WITH 

 OTHER GEOLOGICAL SURVEYS AND WORK- 

 ING GEOLOGISTS. 



To THE Editor of Science: Certain ques- 

 tions raised by the correspondence published 

 by Professor Branner in Science for October 

 26 are, as he says, of general interest; and, 

 in view of the manner in which they are there 

 presented, require a statement of the prin- 

 ciples which govern the United States Geolog- 

 ical Survey in its relations with other geolog- 

 ical surveys and working geologists. 



There is among scientists in general a rule 

 of courtesy that denies to others the privilege 

 •of investigation in a direction which one has 

 jnade his own by reason of his contributions 



to knowledge along that line. The rule is 

 variously construed in different countries and 

 by different men, but it is no part of my pur- 

 pose to minimize its force. It has been recog- 

 nized by the national survey since the days of 

 Director King, and is now effective in rela- 

 tions with individuals and state surveys. It 

 is, however, necessarily controlled by the prog- 

 ress of the general survey and the development 

 of general plans, which sometimes require that 

 work shall be done by the national organiza- 

 tion notwithstanding meritorious individual 

 claims. Moreover, professional courtesy on 

 the part of a public official is subject to limita- 

 tions imposed by his obligation to Congress 

 and to the people to render prompt and effi- 

 cient service. 



A long experience, including relations with 

 nearly all the working geologists of the coun- 

 try, has clearly demonstrated that men whose 

 first obligation is to a university can not work 

 as efficiently for the national survey as can 

 the geologists constantly in its employ, and 

 recognition of this fact has led in recent years 

 to a reduction of the proportional amount of 

 work allotted to teachers of geology, who can 

 give but a share of their time to it. 



These considerations governed the national 

 survey in the matter of the Arkansas coal 

 fields. Not only professional courtesy but 

 also personal regard prompted the offer of co- 

 operation made to Dr. Branner under date of 

 January 31, 1906, the purpose of which was to 

 secure to him the publication of his results 

 and the credit due him for his service to the 

 state, as well as to avoid unnecessary duplica- 

 tion of field work. The obligation to execute 

 the surveys with that promptness and efficiency 

 which could follow only from undivided atten- 

 tion required that his desire to finish the work 

 should be disregarded. 



It appears from Dr. Branner's latest letter 

 that he still regards the survey of a coal field 

 worth many millions of dollars and capable 

 of serving several millions of people as his 

 personal affair. This bureau is directed on 

 broader lines. He is led by his personal 

 view of the question to misconstrue not only 

 the correspondence which has passed, but also 

 the administrative policy of the national sur- 



