February 14, 1902.] 



SCIENCE. 



253 



ing to fix in advance the place of meeting 

 of the proposed new society or section or to 

 determine unnecessarily any detail of its 

 policy by a resolution passed by this body 

 at this tim5. If its members should prefer 

 peripatetic meetings to those held at one 

 fixed point, I think it should be possible for 

 them so to determine, especially as that is 

 now the policy of the whole group of socie- 

 ties associated in this organization. 



I am obliged to you, Mr. Chairman, for 

 the opportunity to participate in this dis- 

 cussion, which I owe to your courtesy only ; 

 and I have spoken merely on a few points 

 which have occurred to me as I listened to 

 those who have preceded me. 



S. A. Forbes. 



University of Illinois. 



' A HAN0 apart from the rest of the body 

 is not a hand,' said Aristotle, and modern 

 psychology shows that each of us exists 

 only in his relations to others. Writing 

 and the printing-press have made science 

 possible by permitting intercourse between 

 those separated in time and space, but they 

 have not done away with the necessity for 

 personal contact. Correspondence schools 

 can not replace universities, nor do jour- 

 nals and books make needless the coming 

 together of scientific men. The organiza- 

 tion of academies and societies has been 

 an essential factor in the development of 

 modern science. Two or three hundred 

 years ago the men of a neighborhood began 

 to meet to discuss scientific questions. 

 Fifty to a hundred years ago, when rail- 

 ways made it possible, national associations 

 were established. As the sciences became 

 differentiated, the academies and associa- 

 tions met in sections, and special societies 

 were established in each country for differ- 

 ent sciences. These societies or their mem- 

 bers now meet occasionally in inter- 

 national congresses. 



We have indeed at present a somewhat 



bewildering array of scientific societies 

 which have arisen in answer to special 

 needs. It is time that the methods of 

 science should be applied to their proper 

 coordination. The two closest bonds of 

 union are common interest in a subject 

 and local proximity. We have, as a matter 

 of fact, national societies for nearly every 

 science, and local academies in nearly all 

 our larger centers. When there are enough 

 students of the same subject in the same 

 place we have the natural unit; these groups 

 should unite on the one hand to form 

 the local academy, and on the other hand 

 to form the national society. The national 

 societies should be parts of a great national 

 association. The presentation and discus- 

 sion of research belong to the special socie- 

 ties; the coordination of the work of dif- 

 ferent sciences, legislation on behalf of 

 science as a whole, and the representation 

 of science before the intelligent public, be- 

 long to the national association. For the 

 transaction of business, this association 

 can no longer be a plebiscite, but must be a 

 house of delegates representing the scien- 

 tific interests of the country, 



The American Society of Naturalists, 

 with which we are at present more espe- 

 cially concerned, represents certain sciences 

 and a certain region; it does not form an 

 integral part of what appears to be the 

 trend of scientific organization. Historic- 

 ally our society has performed a service 

 of immense value. In the limitation of 

 participation in its work to scientific men, 

 in delegating special papers to special 

 societies affiliated with it, in its discussions 

 of questions of general scientific interest, 

 and in its choice of midwinter as a time of 

 meeting, it has set an example to the Amer- 

 ican Association. In recent years, how- 

 ever, the American Association has main- 

 tained the same scientific standard, and 

 we have practically one group of scientific 

 societies meeting in midsummer and an- 



