JULY 23, 1897. ] 
study conducted by Miss Hayes include me- 
chanics, thermodynamics, geodynamics and 
theoretical astronomy. 
PROFESSOR HUGO DE VRIES, of Amsterdam, 
has been called to the chair of botany in the 
University of Wurzburg as successor to the late 
Professor J. Sachs. In the same University, Pro- 
fessor Ph. Stohr, of Zurich, has been appointed 
professor of anatomy in succession to Professor 
vy. Kolliker, who will hereafter confine himself 
to histology andembryology. Dr. Salomon has 
qualified as docent in geology and mineralogy 
in the University at Heidelberg. 
DISCUSSION AND CORRESPONDENCE. 
NEW TERMS IN GEOLOGY. 
PROFESSOR Davis, speaking in behalf of new 
terms in geology and geography (SCIENCE, July 
2, p. 24), makes the following points: that new 
terms are necessary to any advancing science ; 
that new things and new ideas must have new 
names, and that the investigator must be left 
as free to name his conclusions as to reach them. 
He mentions some terms introduced by Powell 
in 1874 as examples of useful ones, and others 
of later introduction which he expects to see 
survive ; at the same time he admits that he has 
been not a little amused at watching the rest of 
us ‘wrestle’ with new terms. 
These contentions seem at first glance to be 
altogether reasonable. But that new terms are 
demanded by an advancing science is admissible 
only in a limited sense. The discovery of new 
elements, new materials, new biologic forms, all 
call for new names. ‘To these no one thinks of 
objecting. Aside from such cases, what book 
published in the last fifty years has contributed 
more than any other to the advance of science 
all along the line? Darwin’s ‘Origin of Spe- 
cies.’ And how many new terms did Mr. Dar- 
win use? Not one—if we except such an ex- 
pression as ‘natural selection.’ 
The newest science of which I have any 
knowledge is that now being remarkably de- 
veloped by Dr. Charles H. Gilbert, of Stanford 
University, in studying geographic and geologic 
changes by means of the fish faunas. And I 
venture to say that his splendid results will 
eventually be brought forth, not dressed in the 
SCIENCE. 
133 
paraphernalia of a new terminology, but with- 
out the use of a single new expression. 
It certainly does not follow, then, that an ad- 
vancing science and new ideas must, of necessity, 
have new names. 
As for freedom to name one’s conclusions, I 
would ask: Is this naming a matter that con- 
cerns the finder alone, or does it concern every 
one who has to do with the science? Are facts 
and conclusions private property to be named, 
like one’s dog, as the owner happens to fancy, 
or are they a part of science, and to be named 
with some reference to those who may have to 
use them ? 
Mention is made of certain geographic terms 
that are expected to prove useful. I may 
specify one of these—Cuesta (Spanish for the 
flank or slope of a hill, but also used for a hill 
itself)—as the kind of a word which, in my 
opinion, is not demanded either by the necessi- 
ties of an advancing science, or as representing 
anew idea. And if wesee fit to name one kind 
of a hill cwesta, with just as much reason we 
may baptize with new technical names all the 
different parts, kinds, sizes and shapes of hills 
on the face of the earth, while students may be 
asked to fill their bellies with these husks of 
science under the impression that they are ne- 
cessary parts of the science itself. Everyone 
remembers the story of Agassiz setting a new 
student to study a case of birds, and how, when 
he reported a few hours later that he knew all 
of their names, he was told to forget the names 
and to go back and study the birds. 
But the main point is whether such things 
advance knowledge or serve important pur- 
poses in that advancement. When Mr. Gilbert 
described certain structural features of deep- 
seated igneous rocks he adyanced our knowl- 
edge, and when he gave us a rational name by 
which to call those hitherto unknown forms he 
gave us a label for that knowledge. But it 
hardly follows from an instance of this kind 
that forms and structures that geologists have 
long known and comprehended should be given 
new names either from the Spanish or from any 
other language. We shall not understand a 
synclinal mountain any better by calling it a 
‘Shickshinny.’ It is hardly a case of new bot- 
tles needed for new wine. 
