EDITORIALS. 
National Scientific Appointments. — The history of the Smith- 
sonian Institution, considered in the previous issue, is a highly 
creditable one. That it is so is doubtless due to the high charac- 
ter of its secretaries. In their eminent fitness for the positions 
they have filled they constitute a striking contrast to the series 
of heads of other governmental scientific bureaus. The reason 
for this contrast is doubtless the different method of appoint- 
ment. The chief of many scientific bureaus is appointed by the 
President, who is subjected to the importunities of politicians who 
have a debt to pay to some political friend. Such importunities it 
is more than human always to resist. The President should be 
relieved from them in the case of the scientific bureaus. The 
experience of the Smithsonian Institution suggests the method. The 
secretary is here appointed by the Board of Regents, composed of 
the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, who is 
also the presiding officer, the Vice President of the United States, 
three Senators appointed by the Vice President, three members of 
the House of Representatives appointed by the Speaker, and two 
citizens of Washington and four “citizens of a state” appointed by 
joint resolution of Congress. Such a committee, meeting at least 
once a year, soon catches the spirit of the Institution, and seeks 
only its best interests; at the same time it keeps the bureau in 
touch with Congress, to which it looks for appropriations. Another 
point : the two secretaries who have succeeded Henry have held the 
office of ‘first assistant secretary. Thus a continuity in the adminis- 
tration of the office has been secured. The moral of the experience 
of the Smithsonian Institution is that the appointment of the chiefs 
of our national scientific bureaus should be made by boards com- 
posed of scientific men and members of Congress, who shall keep in 
touch with the workings of the bureau, and shall, as far as possible, 
in their appointments follow the principle of promotion. 
‘ 
A Uniform System of Craniometry. — The deplorable lack of 
harmony which still exists in the measurements and methods of 
craniologists is discouraging to the student, and renders the results 
obtained by each observer of less value to others for compara- 
