122 



SCIENCE. 



[Vol. XVI. No. 395 



culty in understandiog the necessity of co-operation between the 

 State and the National surveys. 



Take as another example the chemical analyses made for geo- 

 logical purposes. The chemists of State and National surveys 

 have thrown upon them a vast amount of heterogeneous work, 

 while but little or no time is left them for original investigations. 

 A great many of their analyses are duplicated elsewhere, or may 

 be duplicated in any number of laboratories, so that investigations 

 that might otherwise have been possible are prevented, and both 

 chemistry and geology are hindered. 



The errors made by geologists not connected with the surveys 

 are mainly due to haste, or, in other words, to expression of 

 opinion based upon too limited observations. But only limited 

 ' observations are possible to m'-n of limited time for the work, and 

 limited means to work with, a limited area to work in. limited 

 acquaintance with field geologists, and limited opportunities for 

 publication. There are many young geologists and men of but 

 little experience — amateurs — whose efforts are not so directed as 

 to be of as much service as they might be. They lack neither zeal 

 nor means in many cases, but they do lack some one to guide 

 their tottering footsteps. Their want of experience gives them but 

 a restricted view of the field in which they are laboring. Their 

 labors can not, therefore, unless directed by some one who has a 

 sufficiently broad view of the whole field, be of any value to geol- 

 ogy. Who will direct them ? Or shall they goon piling higher their 

 wasted energies, and find themselves when they have come to the 

 end with the mortification of knowing that, though they have 

 worked hard and faithfully, they have, in reality, contributed 

 nothing to the sum of human knowledge? 



If we could have some sort of co-operation, a man at work upon 

 a particular subject would have some assurance that his field of 

 operations would be. within all reasonable limits, left to him. A.S 

 matters now stand a geologist is often obliged to mount guard 

 over his own grounds and his own work to keep the unscrupulous 

 and unbridled camp-followers of science from walking off with 

 and getting the credit for the results of his labors. 



Co-operation would enable each one to concentrate his efforts 

 upon that line of work or that investigation in which he is espe- 

 cially interested. As matters have gone heretofore, no State sur- 

 vey and no man on a State survey has been able to take up any 

 one subject in a systematic and thorough manner unless it has 

 happened that some one group of facts has been available in his 

 own State alone. Take any topic you may choose for a test, and 

 you will find this to be an invariable rule. 



Do the best we may, there is not one of us who may not be 

 benefited more or less by a friendly criticism. And it is of great 

 importance to the science that these criticisms be made before our 

 results or observations are published. In this way we may avoid 

 adding to that vast talus of geologic trash beneath which the 

 science of geology is buried more and more each year. Such 

 criticism is not possible except under conditions that enable us to 

 know the lay of the land with reference to other geologists and to 

 what they have done and are doing. 



It should be distinctly understood from the outset that such 

 work is to be, not subordination, but co-ordination, and above all, 

 co-operation. The demands of scientific work do not require, and 

 the conditions and peculiarities surrounding scientific ambition 

 and devotion do not admit of the most successful and satisfactory 

 work being done by machinery. 



I would not by any means destroy the autonomy of local soci- 

 eties or of independent workers not formally connected with the 

 public surveys. Certain independence of thought and action is 

 essential to scientific advancement, and friendly rivalry is not 

 only not injurious, but it is extremely helpful, and in many cases 

 absolutely essential. I have no idea that a "perpetual motion" 

 sort of a geological machine can be devised, or that any arrange- 

 ment or adjustment of parts is possible which will entirely do 

 away with friction. 



It is scarcely possible that any device that can be made or sug- 

 gested would be perfectly satisfactory, but it certainly is reason- 

 able to expect that some system of co-operation can be devised and 

 put into practical operation. If ever such co-operation should be 

 brought about, several points must be kept in mind by us all. As 



much latitude as possible would have to be allowed individuality. 

 Men are not like pieces of coal to be separated and classified by 

 sizes or by specific gravity. 



Administrative methods devised for scientific work, like those 

 of diplomacy, are often a series of compromises, and good sense 

 must make up for the defects of any system. 



No plan of co-operation can succeed if we do not all take a broad 

 and unselfish view of science and its functions. Local talent 

 should be utilized. It would in many cases save a good deal that 

 now goes to pay travelling expenses, to say nothing of the impor- 

 tance of keeping all the geologists of the country actively inter- 

 ested in geological work. 



Now, if geologic work can be improved by being under the 

 nominal direction of those best fitted to direct, where are we to 

 find our directors? The men who have done most to popularize' 

 the science of geology in this country are our professional geolo- 

 gists, and it is not unnatural that we should turn to them. But 

 the teachers of a science are not necessarily the best directors of 

 research, while they are probably in no case thoroughly conversant 

 with the work being done by the various State surveys and by the 

 National survey. 



The direction of work over the whole country would be quite as 

 impossible, or even more so, from the States. 



The National survey, standing as it does at the head of all the 

 geologic work done in the country, having the whole national 

 domain as its field, and composed, as it is, of our best geologists, 

 and having the most thorough organization, is, or should be, the 

 natur.al head and director of all geological work in this country. 

 I have no doubt that the National survey would be glad to help, 

 in so far as it can, to unify and give useful direction to this work. 



I take this ground in the face of the statement of the distin- 

 guished Director of the United States Geological Survey, who has 

 said that "all of this scientific research under National, State, or 

 local patronage cannot be controlled by some central authority as 

 an army by its general, from the fact that scientific men, com- 

 petent to pursue original research, are peculiarly averse to dictation 

 and official management. Scientific men spurn authority, but 

 seek for co-ordination." 



Such a statement as this must necessarily be taken with some 

 allowance. The function of a director or of a superior, in science 

 at least, is not, to be sure, that of a commander ordering here and 

 there men who must act like machines, who must have no inde- 

 pendent opinions or plans of their own; he must rather be a helper, 

 a man to encourage, to suggest, to fire with enthusiasm those 

 under him, and to unify the work of the organization of which he 

 is the head. Scientific men do not spurn authority if there is any 

 reason for it, and as a proof of it we may cite the United States 

 Geological Survey itself, as well as all the State Geological 

 Surveys in this country, or, for the matter of that, in the world. 

 The members of these surveys submit to all reasonable authority, 

 but they are also put upon congenial work, and they are per- 

 mitted to do that work pretty much in their own way. Now, 

 why can there not be an organization of all geologists, ruore or less 

 similar to this ? ' 



We may disabuse our minds of the thought that there is a 

 probability or even a possibility of the Government monopoliz- 

 ing geology. It can't do it; geology belongs to the geologists, 

 whether the Government helps carry on geologic investigations or 

 not. 



My conclusions are:— 



1. That the great and valuable contributions to geologic knowl- 

 edge must be made by our official surveys, for they alone have 

 the means for producing them — for gathering the facts, giving the 

 necessary time to philosophical thought and discussion, and for 

 furnishing the necessary illustrations and distributing the publi- 

 cations. 



3. That economic problems should be left, in so far as it is pos- 

 sible, to the State surveys, while the National survey should deal 

 with those requiring larger means and a wider range of observa- 

 tions. 



3. That all the working geologists of the country should be 

 brought into official or quasi-official relations with the State and 

 National surveys, and their efforts and skill thus utilized. 



