July if 1884.] 



SCIENCE, 



Commencement at Harvard last year was 

 enlivened by the vigorous speech of Charles 

 Francis Adams, initiating what may almost 

 be called a national discussion of the Greek 

 question. This year the subject of ' academic 

 degrees ' is brought into prominence by a paper, 

 published in the July Century, from the pen 

 of Dr. Woolsey. It will not surprise us if a 

 discussion of this subject, begun by one who 

 has held with honor the post of president of 

 Yale college, and is still a member of the 

 degree-giving board, should run for the next 

 twelve months, and draw out opinions as 

 diverse as those lately printed on the compar- 

 ative value of classical and scientific studies. 

 Most of Dr. Woolsey 's article is historical, 

 with incidental references to his own opinions. 

 Toward the close, however, he makes some 

 suggestions with respect to the bestowal of 

 honorary degrees which are worth considera- 

 tion. He is heartily opposed to the random 

 methods now in vogue of complimenting men 

 who are accidentally brought forward. He 

 does not object to the guarded admission of 

 meritorious students to the lower academic 

 degrees causa honoris, when the}' have been 

 prevented by illness or poverty from attaining 

 their diplomas in a regular way ; and in cases 

 of rare and distinguished merit he would admit 

 to the same honors " discoverers of important 

 principles in science, who had had, perhaps, no 

 public education whatever." 



But in respect to what are now bestowed as 

 honorary titles (the degrees of LL.D. and 

 D.D.) , he would allow any graduate to prepare, 

 b}' the study of years, for the highest degree 

 within his reach, whether he resides within the 

 college or not. The proficiency of each can- 

 didate should be tested by rigid examinations. 

 Thus a student of law or theology might first 

 take a baccalaureate degree in either of these 

 faculties, — say, four years after taking his 

 B.A. degree, — and eight years still later he 

 might offer himself as a candidate for the degree 

 of doctor of laws or theology. As a protec- 

 tion against the confounding of titles honorably 

 won with those bestowed by careless or feeble 



institutions, Dr. "Woolsey suggests that the in- 

 dication of a degree shall be followed by the 

 name of the place where it was won. We 

 imagine that it will amuse some readers, and 

 amaze some others , when the}' read the melan- 

 choly statement, made hy one who for nearly 

 forty years has been annually creating honor- 

 ary doctors, that " these honorary degrees are 

 bestowed on no evidence of thorough learning in 

 theology or in law, and thus are in no wa}~ cer- 

 tificates of deserving the honors, saving, that, for 

 some reason or other, the corporation of a col- 

 lege regards the person thus honored as a man 

 worthy of notice beyond most of his fellows." 



About two months ago we urged the Mas- 

 sachusetts legislature to be slow in rejecting 

 the offer of the U. S. geological survey to 

 prepare at divided cost a topographical map of 

 the state. We are glad to state that the com- 

 mittee on expenditures, in whose hands the 

 matter was placed, reported favorably ; both 

 houses passed the resolve submitted ; and the 

 governor has now made the excellent choice, 

 as commissioners, of Pres. Francis A. Walker 

 of the Massachusetts institute of technology, 

 Mr. Henry L. Whiting of Tisbuiy, and Prof. 

 N. S. Shaler of Harvard college. The resolve 

 appropriates forty thousand dollars, to be ex- 

 tended over at least three years. The names 

 of the commissioners are a guarant}' that the 

 interests of the state will be well administered, 

 and that the suggestions made in our columns 

 will not be lost sight of. 



LETTERS TO THE EDITOR. 



*** Correspondents are requested to be as brief as possible. 

 The writer's name is in all cases required as proof of good faith. 



Radiant heat. 



It is much to be regretted that a mathematical 

 physicist of the standing of Mr. Fitzgerald should, 

 in his letter published in your issue of May 16. confine 

 himself to ex cathedra deliverances upon the question 

 at issue between us, instead of attempting some direct 

 demonstration upon the points involved, as I had 

 suggested would be desirable. Had he done so, he 

 would not, I am sure, have fallen into the curious 

 mistakes which he emphasizes so strongly. In 

 default of the desired investigation of the question by 

 Mr. Fitzgerald, 1 hope that the following reasoning 



