204 



THE OOLOGIST. 



is safe in doing the work legitimately 

 belonging to his profession. 



The Geologist, Botanist, Ornitholo- 

 gist,IchthyOlogist,or Mammalogis't finds 

 himself confronted on every hand by 

 laws which, were a complaint made, 

 would subject him to severe penalties. 

 The Icthyologist makes himself a law- 

 breaker if he preserves a specimen of a 

 fish. The law distinctly says that no 

 minnows or small fish fry shall be taken 

 for any purpose except for bait, and 

 makes the possession of a fish scale, fish 

 tail, or a fish's tin, prima facia evidence 

 of a violation of law. Woe unto the 

 Biologist who attempts to make any in- 

 vestigations. 



The Ornithologist only is recognized 

 and he only is insulted and treated as a 

 vandal. He must get a special permit 

 for each month to take two of each spe- 

 cies in one county only and only of such 

 species as are named in his application. 

 A fine of $5 is imposed for every bird's 

 egg collected, and no permits issued. 



A Botanist may be arrested and pun- 

 ished for any specimen of plant he may 

 dig up. The Geologist for any speci- 

 men he may collect. 



That there should be some laws pro- 

 tecting birds, fish, game, etc , is plainly 

 proper, but the scientist is not the van- 

 dal that calls for these laws. It is the 

 professional sport, the small boy, the 

 vandal who kills the small birds to ob- 

 tain their skins to ornament some so- 

 called lady's head, that need to be reg- 

 ulated. Some scientists may be wan- 

 tonly destructive, what vocation has no 

 black sheep? these should also be re- 

 strained. But it is an outrage, and in- 

 sult, that no other vocation would bear 

 to be ti - eated as the Michigan statue 

 books treat us. 



Shall we as scientists continue to 

 tamely submit to such treatment? Is it 

 not evident that we must combine for 

 mutual protection? And, what voca- 

 tion is not benefited, enlightened, and 

 advanced by an organization, and con- 



sequent meetings? Someone asks, why 

 is a general organization desirable* 

 For the reason there is really but one. 

 great broad field of science comprising 

 to be sure of several departments, each 

 department having its own special 

 corps of workers, and yet all these de-. 

 partments are mutually related and 

 workers in each department have mu- 

 tual interests with those of every other 

 department. 



Besides there are generalists among 

 scientists, Linneus, Agassiz, Darwin, 

 Baird, et al, were generalists, notably 

 Linneus, who left his imprint upon 

 every department of Botany and Zoolo- 

 ogy, one cannot glance over works in 

 these branches without profound aston-. 

 ishment at the vast amount of work ac* 

 complishhd by thess workers, as evi- 

 denced by the vast numbers of species 

 that he named in both the animal and 

 vegetable kingdoms. Darwin worked 

 in the same fields, Agassiz and Baird 

 left their imprint upon all branches of 

 Zoology. 



No worker in any branch of the vast 

 field of science can proceed far without 

 finding golden chains binding all bran. 

 ches of science together. Then why not 

 a general organization for mutual pro-, 

 tection, improvement, and advance-, 

 ment. 



Four classes of labors should be re-, 

 cognized in such an organization, — the 

 professional, the amateur, the student, 

 and the friend of science. Each should 

 be duly noticed and encouraged. Suit- 

 able fields for work may be found for 

 each of these classes, bigotry and intol- 

 erance should be frowned upon. 



There should be national, state and 

 local organizations, arid national, state 

 and local meetings. Each organization 

 should own and eonti'ol a museum and 

 library. Scientific expeditions should 

 be fitted out. Annual encampments in 

 localities specially fitted for field work 

 and others practical work, should not 

 be neglected. 



