December 26, 1903.] 



SCIENCE. 



1023 



passed Michigan and now ranks third, or if 

 Columbia's extension students be deducted, 

 second, with Columbia third. Michigan oc- 

 cupies fourth place, and then come Cali- 

 fornia, Minnesota, Cornell and Wisconsin 

 in the same relative positions as last year. 

 , Northwestern 's increase of over 400 has 

 placed her ahead of both Yale and Penn- 

 sylvania, which occupy tenth and eleventh 

 places, respeetivel)'. Nebraska has passed 

 Indiana, likewise showing an increase of 

 almost 400. Syracuse also has a larger en- 

 rolment than Indiana. After Indiana and 

 Missouri comes Leland Stanford, which has 

 passed Princeton. 



As far as the diiferent departments are 

 concerned, it will be seen that Harvard 

 still shows by far the largest collegiate en- 

 rolment. On the whole there has been a 

 small increase in the total number of col- 

 lege students attending the universities 

 under consideration. The scientific schools 

 show a large general increase all along the 

 line, with the single exception of Missouri. 

 There are fewer law students than there 

 were in 1901, in spite of the fact that 

 Chicago has added a law faculty since last 

 year. The total number of medical stu- 

 dents also shows a decrease, which is ac- 

 counted for largely by the facts that the 

 admission requirements at Columbia have 

 been strengthened, and that the last class 

 admitted at Harvard without the degree 

 requirements graduated in the spring. 

 Michigan has still the largest enrolment in 

 its law faculty, and Columbia still heads 

 the list in the faculty of medicine and in 

 the graduate schools. The grand total of 

 graduate students shows a slight increase 

 over that of last year. There have been 

 no important changes in the relative rank- 

 ing of the teaching force in the largest 

 institutions, Harvard still leading, with 

 Columbia second. Rudolf Tombo, Je.. 

 Columbia Unitoesity. Registrar. 



NEW DEPARTURES IN THE BIBLIOGRAPH- 

 ICAL WORK OF THE CONCILIUM 

 BIBLIOGRAPHICUM. 



Since an article published in the Amer- 

 ican Naturalist in 1898 no adequate ac- 

 count of the work of the Concilium Biblio- 

 graphicum has appeared in the scientific 

 press. Science has regularly reprinted 

 extracts from the 'Annual Statements' of 

 the Concilium, but these notices have 

 necessarily been somewhat disconnected 

 and have not emphasized certain features 

 of the work insufficiently appreciated in 

 America. 



The bibliographical references gathered 

 by the Concilium may, for practical pur- 

 poses, be divided into two great categories, 

 the manuscript cards and the printed cards. 

 The references contained in the former are 

 far more numerous than those recorded in 

 the latter, and in general the bibliography 

 in manuscript form is a very essential part 

 of our task. Although open to subscrip- 

 tion, this bibliography is quite unknown 

 in America, not even a sample card ever 

 having been asked for. In regard to the 

 printed bibliography the state of affairs is 

 somewhat better, but our work is, never- 

 theless, insufficiently understood, as a con- 

 sultation of our siibscription list must 

 show. 



The printed card catalogue is supplied 

 according to two entirely different arrange- 

 ments, each of which has its utility— the 

 alphabetical authors' catalogue and the 

 methodical arrangement, embracing as 

 chief subdivisions : paleontology, general 

 biology, microscopy, zoology, anatomy and 

 physiology. To have an ideally complete 

 bibliography, an institution should have 

 these two arrangements complete. 



Such subscriptions have been received 

 from European institutions ; none ever 

 reached us from America. The nearest 

 approach to this condition is to be fovrnd 

 in the University of Minnesota, where two 



