October 24, 1902.] 



SCIENCE. 



651 



As regards the breeding of animals, 

 almost all the work thus far done by the 

 experiment stations has been empirical in 

 character. There is at present no satisfac- 

 tory manual on the breeding of animals 

 written from a scientific standpoint, and I 

 am informed that the data for such a 

 treatise are not available. To make a thor- 

 ough study of the science of animal breed- 

 ing would require the maintenance of con- 

 siderable numbers of animals and studies 

 continuing over many years. 



I have cited nutrition and animal breed- 

 ing as among the subjects -on which elabo- 

 rate and costly scientific investigations are 

 needed, because I happen to be somewhat 

 familiar with the nature of investigations 

 in these lines. There are of course many 

 other lines in which similar investigations 

 are equally needed. 



From what I have said it is plain that, 

 as regards the Carnegie Institution, I am 

 in favor of the expenditure of its income 

 in relatively large blocks for the mainte- 

 nance of elaborate investigations on a 

 limited number of fundamental problems 

 of science, and especially those fundamental 

 problems on the solution of which largely 

 depends the improvement of the conditions 

 of human life, industry and society. 



A. C. True. 



It would be presumptuous for any one 

 to suppose that he has solved the difficult 

 problem that is before the trustees of the 

 Carnegie Institution. They are to be com- 

 mended for the free expression of opinion 

 they have invited, and doubtless the policy 

 they adopt will represent a fair resultant 

 of the varying competent opinions of 

 American men of science. In any discus- 

 sion of a general policy one cannot deal 

 with details except by way of illustration, 

 and illustrations are taken most naturally 

 from one's own department of work. 



I have taken for granted that the pur- 



pose of the Carnegie fund is to increase 

 the opportunities for scientific research, so 

 that the results may be more commensurate 

 with the number and ability of investi- 

 gators. This means that it is to supple- 

 ment the efforts made by existing institu- 

 tions, which in the main are the govern- 

 ment scientific bureaus and the universities. 

 To duplicate what these institutions are 

 already equipped to do would seem to be a 

 waste of this particular fund. There is 

 probably no diversity of opinion in refer- 

 ence to this proposition, and the real prob- 

 lem is to discover wise methods of supple- 

 menting the opportunities for research. 



My own constant thought has been thiat 

 no single costly enterprise should be un- 

 dertaken at first which might pledge per- 

 manently a large amount of the income, 

 and might prove presently to be either 

 unprofitable or too narrow. For example, 

 the expenditure involved in the purchase 

 and development of the Marine Biological 

 Laboratory at Woods Hole would certainly 

 lock up all the funds available for biology, 

 and this would be a narrow view to take 

 of the opportunities needed for biological 

 research. Speaking for my own subject, 

 fundamental as are the problems that must 

 be investigated in a marine laboratory, 

 there are botanical investigations of equal 

 importance that must be made over the 

 general surface of the country. It has 

 seemed to me, therefore, that the first ex- 

 periment to be conducted by means of the 

 Carnegie fund is to discover how it may 

 be expended so as to yield the largest re- 

 sults. As laboratory students we know that 

 no amount of discussion will result in this 

 discovery, but that trials must be made 

 before 'the trail is struck.' This means 

 the absence of any detailed and rigid pol- 

 icy at present, but one of such great flexi- 

 bility that retreat is possible at every 

 point. 



To make this endowment perennially 



