Febeuaky 5, 1904.] 



SCIENCE. 



231 



seems to me that this work might be even more 

 effective if conducted in conjunction with the 

 American Chemical Society. 



The same tendency to disintegrate seems to 

 pervade the other sciences. For instance, I 

 note that at the St. Louis meeting there were 

 represented in tlie American Association the 

 American Society of Naturalists and the 

 American Society of Zoologists. Now, of 

 course, I do not know just what kind of a. 

 science naturalism is, but I suppose a part of 

 its work is zoology. I also notice that there 

 were represented the Association of Economic 

 Entomologists and the Entomological Club of 

 the Association, the Association of Plant 

 Breeders, the Botanical Club of the Associa- 

 tion, the Botanical Society of America, the 

 Central Botanists' Association, the Wild 

 Flower Preservation Society of America and 

 the Fern Chapter. Again I am at a loss to 

 know exactly what a fern chapter is, but I 

 assume that it has something to do with 

 botany. I also note the presence of some so- 

 cieties which can hardly be associated with 

 any one science, for instance, the ' Sigma Xi 

 Honorary Scientific Society,' the Society for 

 Horticultural Science and the Society for the 

 Promotion of Agricultural Science. Would 

 it not be better for all parties concerned if all 

 these botanical clubs and societies were sec- 

 tions of one great national society? It seems 

 to me, therefore, that the sections of the asso- 

 ciation devoted to physics could thus become 

 aiEliated or become really the American Phys- 

 ical Society, the geological bodies become the 

 American Geological Society, zoologists be- 

 come the American Zoological Society, the en- 

 tomologists the American Entomological So- 

 ciety, and all the botanical clubs be united in 

 the American Botanical Society. The presi- 

 dents of these societies, respectively, wotald be- 

 come the presidents of the sections of the asso- 

 ciation. This would in no way interfere with 

 the atitonomy of the national scientific so- 

 cieties, but would unite them all under a com- 

 mon head, namely, the American Association 

 for the Advancement of Science. It would 

 also permit the great national societies to 

 divide up into sections to study special sub- 

 jects. Separate sections of the American 



Association could be formed for scientific 

 discussion of general subjects such as econom- 

 ics, medicine, etc. It would, indeed, be excel- 

 lent if the American Medical Society would 

 become afiiliated in a similar way with the 

 association. If all this could be accomplished, 

 instead of having four thousand members of 

 the American Association, we would have four 

 times that number. The moral effect of such 

 a union would be great and its economical 

 effect still greater. 



There may be many objections to such a 

 form of affiliation, but judging from experi- 

 ence in connection with the American Chem- 

 ical Society and its relation to the American 

 Association, I should say that these objections 

 are not fatal. H. W. Wiley. 



To THE Editor of Science: A response to 

 your inquiry, if a faithful reflection of my 

 convictions, may serve only to range me with 

 a conservative minority on this matter of 

 scientific organization and expose me to the 

 raking fire of the progressists. 



I confess to a feeling of apprehension at 

 the insistent and impetuous efforts which are 

 making toward the centralization of scientific 

 endeavor in the United States and the crea- 

 tion of a formidable scientific machine in 

 which individuality is to be reduced to a cog. 

 Scientific organization on a grand scale is 

 claimed in your recent vigorous brief on its 

 behalf, to be important, not for the good of 

 the scientific man, but for that of science, in 

 which particular the science union or science 

 syndicate will differ from the actual genius in 

 the combinations of labor or capital. These 

 are organized emphatically for the benefit of 

 the individuals who are in, not for any such 

 vague objective as the good of labor or the 

 idealizing of business. The ideal man of 

 science may be so supramundane that he can 

 afford to give allegiance to such an altruistic 

 purpose as the enthronement of science re- 

 gardless of his own interests, but the actual 

 scientific investigator, no whit below the ideal 

 in his ardor, wants to do the work, as much 

 of it as his powers and his years permit, to 

 achieve all within the range of his opportuni- 

 ties; and he also has a just pride in and right 



