792 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XXII. No. 572. 



Mr. H. E. Higly, Pennsylvania College : ' Sug- 

 gestions for the First Twelve Lessons in Demon- 

 strative Geometry.' 



Dr. John S. French, Jacob Tome Institute, 

 Port Deposit : * Some Essentials of the Successful 

 Mathematics Teacher.' 



Dr. H. a. Converse, Baltimore Polytechnic In- 

 stitute : ' The Teaching of Geometry.' 



The association was disappointed at not 

 being able to listen to a paper on ' The Teach- 

 ing of Pure and Applied Mathematics/ vphich 

 the program announced vpas to be read by 

 President E. S. Woodward, of the Carnegie 

 Institution, Washington. 



The following officers were elected for the 

 coming year: 



President — Professor E. S. Crawley, University 

 of Pennsylvania. , 



Vice-President — Dr. John S. French, Jacob 

 Tome Institute, Port Deposit, Md. 



Secretary and Treasurer — Dr. J. T. Rorer, Cen- 

 tral High School, Philadelphia, Pa. 



Members of the Council — Professor W. H. 

 Metzler, Syracuse University; Miss L. G. Simons, 

 New York City Normal College; Dr. J. L. Patter- 

 son, Chestnut Hill Academy, Philadelphia, Pa.; 

 Professor W. H. Maltbie, Woman's College of 

 Baltimore. 



At the meeting the following resolution was 

 adopted : 



Resolved: That this association approve of the 

 organization of a national federation of existing 

 associations of teachers of mathematics in which 

 each association shall preserve its own organiza- 

 tion and individuality and which shall have among 

 its objects the joint support of publication. In 

 the federation should be included only societies 

 representing territory as extensive at least as one 

 state. 



DISCUSSION AND CORRESPONDENCE. 



THE RELATIONS OF MUSEUMS TO EXPERTS AND 



SYSTEMATISTS WHO ARE ENGAGED IN WORKING 



UP AND NAMING COLLECTIONS. 



Prom time to time the writer has met those 

 who have maintained the view that a scientific 

 expert is entitled out of collections, whether 

 submitted to him by individuals or by mu- 

 seums, to retain for his own use whatever 

 portion of such collections he may desire to 

 reserve for himself, after having described 

 them. Some years ago a rather well-known 



entomologist in correspondence laid down the 

 proposition that ' it is the unwritten but uni- 

 versal law that an expert to whom scientific 

 material is submitted for study is entitled to 

 retain therefrom anything he pleases,' and 

 further added the statement that ' it is the 

 indefeasible right of an expert to retain for 

 his own use anything which he may wish to 

 reserve out of the collections submitted to 

 him for study.' These statements being 

 wholly contrary to the teachings of his own 

 experience and observation, the writer was 

 moved to address a circular letter of inquiry 

 to a large number of the most eminent scien- 

 tific men charged with the administration of 

 the affairs of museums in America and in 

 Europe, inquiring whether they knew of the 

 existence of any such ' unwritten law ' or 

 recognized any such ' indefeasible right ' on 

 the part of experts to whom they might en- 

 trust material for study. The persons to 

 whom this circular letter was addressed are 

 men who stand in the very foremost ranks of 

 science, among them the heads of the greatest 

 museums in Europe and America, and a score 

 of the most eminent investigators along bio- 

 logical lines now living. 



The writer received not merely a series of 

 replies upon the blanks provided in the cir- 

 cular letter for answers, but in a number of 

 cases lengthy and interesting letters, which 

 showed that some of the gentlemen addressed 

 had encountered those who held this view, 

 which they reprobated as strongly as does the 

 writer himself. Others expressed unmitigated 

 astonishment that any one should have the 

 temerity to propound such propositions, de- 

 claring them to be altogether unheard of and 

 monstrous. Answers were received from 

 forty-four gentlemen in America, who are 

 recognized as the highest authorities in their 

 respective lines of research. Only three of 

 these appeared to claim that usage demands 

 that the expert should be allowed to retain for 

 his own use what he may desire. Two of 

 these were entomologists; one was a botanist. 

 The others most unqualifiedly denied the truth 

 of the propositions and treated them as ridicu- 

 lous. Twenty replies were received from the 



