MARINE BIOLOGICAL STATION AT PORT ERIN. 105 
that is the reason why the official Report*, now published, 
is a somewhat disappointing document in the eyes of 
biologists. It consists of a number of resolutions in 
regard to what is desirable, or what is required in the in- 
vestigation of the sea, and of one recommendation as to 
the formation of a central bureau to control the work and 
conduct a laboratory. 
One section is called a ‘‘ Programme” of work, but 
there is no practical programme of biological work—laying 
down how, when and where the investigations are to be 
carried out—such as was expected, and is required. For, 
surely, what we need most at the present time, in the 
interests of more exact fisheries+ knowledge, is the nearest 
possible approximation to a ‘“‘ census”’ of our seas, begin- 
ning with the territorial waters. Most fisheries disputes 
and differences of opinion are due to the absence of such 
exact knowledge. If such an approximate census, or 
record of really reliable statistics, had been taken fifty 
years ago it would now be invaluable to fisheries inspectors, 
superintendents and local authorities, as well as to biolo- 
gists. Our descendants will justly reproach us if, with 
our increased knowledge and opportunity, we let the 
twentieth century commence without inaugurating some 
such system of statistics. 
The Report of the Conference says nothing of all this. In 
place of asking for boats and men, it expresses many admir- 
able sentiments and pious wishes as to what is desirable and 
what should be done—sentiments and wishes that are 
quite unexceptionable, but which have been before the 
public now for some years, and which are in the main 
+ **Conférence Internationale pour l’Exploration de la Mer, réunie a 
Stockholm, 1899.” 
tT The British Government, we are told, only joined in the Conference in 
the interests of the fisheries applications of marine exploration. 
