October 30, 1903.] 



SCIENCE. 



563 



names. For human anatomy there comes 

 Waldeyer of Berlin ; for comparative anatomy, 

 Fuerbringer of Heidelberg; for embryology, 

 Hertwig of Berlin ; for physiology, Engelmaun 

 of Berlin; for neurology, Erb of Heidelberg; 

 for pathology, Marchand of Leipzig; for 

 pathological anatomy, Orth of Berlin ; for 

 biology, Weismann of Freiburg; for botany, 

 Goebel of Munich ; for mineralogy, Zirkel of 

 Leipzig; for geography, Gerland of Strass- 

 burg; for physical chemistry, Van't Hoff of 

 Berlin ; for physiological chemistry, Kossel of 

 Heidelberg; for geophysics, Weichert of Got- 

 tingen ; for mechanical engineering, Riedler of 

 Berlin; for chemical technology, Witt of Ber- 

 lin, and so on. Or to turn to the department 

 of Professor Dewey : For history of philosophy, 

 Windelband of Pleidelberg; for logic, Riehl 

 of Halle ; for philosophy of nature, Ostwald 

 of I.«ipzig; for methodology of science, Erd- 

 mann of Bonn; for aesthetics, Lipps of 

 Munich; for psychology, Ebbinghaus of 

 Breslau ; for sociology, Toennies of Kiel ; for 

 social psychology, Simmel of Berlin ; for 

 ethnology, von den Steinen of Berlin; for 

 pedagogy, Ziegler of Strassburg. Or to men- 

 tion some other departments : Among the 

 philologists I notice Brugman of Leipzig, 

 Paul of Munich, Delitzsch of Berlin; Sievers 

 of Leipzig, Kluge of Freiburg, Muncker of 

 Mxmich ; Oldenberg of Kiel and others. 

 Among the economists, Schmoller of Berlin, 

 Weber of Heidelberg, Stieda of Leipzig, Con- 

 rad of Halle, Sombart of Breslau, Wagner of 

 Berlin. Among the jurists. Binding of 

 Leipzig, Zorn of Bonn, Jellineck of Heidel- 

 berg, von Lizst of Berlin, Wach of Leipzig, 

 von Bar of Gottingen, Kahl of Berlin, 

 Zitelmann of Bonn, and so on. Among the 

 theologians, Harnack of Berlin, Budde of 

 Marburg, Pfleiderer of Berlin. For classical 

 art, Furtwaengler of Munich ; for modern art, 

 Muther of Breslau ; for mediaeval history, 

 Lamprecht of Leipzig. Enough of the enu- 

 meration. The list from England and from 

 France is on the same level, and I anticipate 

 that when we soon shall send out invitations 

 to several hundred Americans for definite ad- 

 dresses, their response will not be less general, 

 their list not less noble. But American par- 



ticipation is a question of the future. The 

 list of acceptances which I have given here 

 stands as a matter of fact beyond discussion. 

 Is there really any doubt still possible that we 

 have secured on the basis of that disastrous 

 program the greatest combination of leaders 

 of thought which has ever been brought to- 

 gether? When we three came home from our 

 European mission after four months of hard 

 labor to secure this result surpassing our own 

 expectations, we might have felt justified in 

 the hope that scientific men of this country 

 would welcome us otherwise than with the cry 

 that we, under the guise of science, have made 

 science ridiculous. Hugo MOnsterberg. 



Harvard University, 

 October 12, 1903. 



SHORTER ARTICLES. 

 A PLEA FOR BETTER ENGLISH IN SCIENCE. 



That to genuine scholarship is not always 

 conjoined power of expression is common 

 knowledge. Not a few men who have re- 

 ceived academic- training and have been hon- 

 ored with university degrees, who have ex- 

 plored profound mysteries of nature and dis- 

 covered hidden laws, seem to be incapable of 

 clearly explaining the processes they employ 

 in their researches or of plainly setting forth 

 their discoveries. 



Xot long ago a contributor to The Critic 

 said: 



The development of scientific method is alleged 

 to be one of the foremost characteristics of the 

 present century. Philologists will ransack the 

 earth, if not the heavens, for exact information 

 as to date and authorship of even the fragments 

 of ancient literature; botanists will tramp the 

 forests for months to verify or disprove the rumor 

 of a new orchid, and astronomers will go to any 

 accessible point on the face of the globe for more 

 exact figures on an eclipse or a transit of Venus. 

 We might expect, then, to find a corresponding 

 effort for exactness in the expression of thought, 

 but an examination of the evidence is not alto- 

 getlier encouraging. 



A few months ago a Boston editor pub- 

 lished the following paragraph : 



The English language is sufTering violence in 

 many ways. Among those who are forgetting its 



