April 17, 1885. 



SCIENCE. 



327 



departments, in which department four bureaus 

 should be organized to carry on the four principal 

 classes of work: namely, 1. Geodesy, topography, 

 and hydrography; 2. Geology; 3. Meteorology; 4. 

 Physical standards of weights and measures. In 

 order to assist the secretary in charge of the de- 

 partment to which these works are to be trans- 

 ferred, and under whom the four bureaus are to 

 labor, the committee proposes the formation of a 

 permanent commission, which is not charged with 

 any administrative responsibility, but which shall 

 be attached to the office of the secretary of the 

 selected department, and, under his presidency, 

 shall exercise a general control over the work of 

 the four bureaus, and shall have charge and custody 

 of all the archives, apparatus, and other things ap- 

 pertaining to their work. The commissioners are 

 to receive a salary; and, if any of the four bureau 

 officers spend money contrary to their recommen- 

 dation, the commission shall notify the proper 

 authorities. In general, the commission is to an- 

 nually examine, improve, and approve the plans 

 of work and estimates of the four bureaus, but is 

 not charged with purely administrative responsi- 

 bility: it recommends to the secretary or chief of 

 the department whatever is necessary to the best 

 work of the four bureaus, but has no power to en- 

 force its own recommendations except by remon- 

 strance to the auditor against payment of funds. 

 The commission shall, it is suggested, consist of 

 the secretary, the heads of the four bureaus, six 

 officers of the navy and army, two civilian scien- 

 tific men, and the representatives of the Smithso- 

 nian institution and the national academy, — fifteen 

 in all; viz., one statesman, six military officers, four 

 bureau officials, two scientific men, and two acade- 

 micians. Presumably it is contemplated that all 

 shall be chosen by the president or the secretary. 



This second proposition of the committee of aca- 

 demicians we have given somewhat at length; and, 

 if we have not misunderstood it, there is in the 

 proposed advisory commission a want of strength, 

 and absence of personal responsibility, a liability 

 that science will be in the small minority, — a cum- 

 bersome number of persons, such that certainly all 

 of them, or even a majority, will never enter into 

 the merits of the numerous difficult scientific ques- 

 tions that will be laid before them. The consequence 

 will be, that the whole commission will simply ap- 

 prove the recommendations of its own sub- commit- 

 tees, and thus, after all, the conduct of the four 

 bureaus will be entirely in the hands of these bu- 

 reaus themselves. We can easily grant that the 

 transfer to one department, and the organization of 



four bureaus under its secretary, may be a great 

 step towards economy, harmony, and efficiency: but 

 the appointment of an irresponsible commission as 

 advisory to the secretary, who is under more or less 

 obligation to carry out its suggestions, on the one 

 hand gives the fifth wheel to the coach, and on the 

 other hand relieves both the secretary and the super- 

 intendents of the four bureaus of all personal re- 

 sponsibility ; so that if any thing goes wrong, and 

 congress should appoint a committee of investiga- 

 tion, the report must necessarily be that no one is 

 to blame. This arrangement is inferior to that by 

 which the people hold congress, and congress holds 

 the secretary, while he holds the four bureau offi- 

 cers, to a strict personal responsibility; while each 

 has perfect liberty to call in such advice as he feels 

 in need of. 



We have here three propositions. The important 

 general feature of them all is that of consolidation, 

 unification, and systematization of a certain class 

 of government works, either under the Smithsonian, 

 or under a new executive department, or under 

 some existing department. Abstractly such con- 

 solidation appears desirable, it certainly pleases 

 the mind of a systematic person; but whether it 

 will result in the greatest good, for the greatest 

 number, is a question that needs consideration, not 

 so much from an idealistic stand-point as from the 

 side of statistics, experience, and history. Can it 

 be shown, from the experience of nations or smaller 

 corporations, that the combination under one de- 

 partment of such diverse matters is really a step 

 in advance? First of all, what are the diverse in- 

 terests whose welfare we propose to secure ? Only 

 a partial exhibit of government work has been 

 given in the act under which the commission is 

 now proceeding, or in the statements that have 

 been made before it, which specify only the signal- 

 service, geological survey, coast and geodetic sur- 

 vey, and the hydrographic office of the navy. The 

 very first act of the commissioners, in their letter 

 to the president of the national academy, is to call 

 attention to the fact that the preparation of their 

 report involves nothing less than an investigation 

 of four important branches of our government, all 

 scientific in their character, and invites attention 

 to the question, "In what way can these four scien- 

 tific branches be best co-ordinated ? " If such co- 

 ordination on this smaller scale ever be accomplished 

 with good results, it will be an argument for the 

 application of the same principles to the remaining 

 scientific, economical, and practical work of the 

 government. It will therefore be well for us here 

 to consider all such work as is now being prose- 



