April 24, 1885.] 



SCIENCE 



337 



work is that it is far removed from that public 

 criticism which is so conducive to efficiency in 

 other branches of the service. It is difficult 

 to conceive that such a state of things as was 

 exhibited by the survej's of the territories ten 

 years ago could have existed in the perform- 

 ance of any work with which the public were 

 conversant. At that time we had at least two 

 independent survej T s of the territories, prose- 

 cuted by different departments of the govern- 

 ment, and with nominally different objects, but 

 which were practically identical in their actual 

 work. The officers in charge were independ- 

 ently surveying and mapping the very same 

 regions. At the time that Hayden's Atlas of 

 Colorado was published, Capt. Wheeler was 

 engaged in surveying Colorado, and making 

 maps of the territory substantially identical in 

 their objects with those of Hay den. Both 

 surveys were intended to cover the whole pub- 

 lic domain. 



Nothing quite so bad as this is likely to 

 arise in the future. But there is still room for 

 much duplication of work, as well as waste 

 through competition in getting possession of 

 particular fields. As a general rule, the head 

 of a department is quite ready to approve of 

 any extension of work which any of his bureau 

 officers may propose, and has not always time 

 to learn that the same work is being done, or 

 might be better done, by some other depart- 

 ment. The annual provision which congress 

 has got into the habit of inserting into the ap- 

 propriations for the signal-office — "provided 

 that hereafter the work of no other depart- 

 ment, bureau, or commission authorized by 

 law shall be duplicated by this bureau " — is 

 not quite satisfactory : it leaves open the ques- 

 tion whether any proposed work is ' ' the work 

 of any other department, bureau, or com- 

 mission.' ' 



The report of the National academy of sci- 

 ences proposes to remedy some of these evils 

 by placing the general policy of the scientific 

 bureaus under the control of a mixed com- 

 mission, organized somewhat after the plan of 

 the Lighthouse board. If the bureaus are to 

 remain separate, we see no better plan than 



this for securing the proper co-ordination of 

 their work ; but Major Powell points out cer- 

 tain difficulties in the wa}' of its successful 

 operation. His strongest objection is, that 

 subordinate officers of various departments 

 would have to practically control the work, 

 thus reducing the heads of the departments to 

 channels for transmitting instructions. If the 

 proposed commission were to assume any ad- 

 ministrative control of the work, this objection 

 would certainly be fatal. The official respon- 

 sibility of the head of a department for the 

 work of his bureaus should not be interfered 

 with. But the report of the academy ex- 

 pressly disclaims charging the commission 

 with any administrative responsibility. Its 

 sole function was to prescribe the polic}^ of the 

 bureaus ; that is, to decide what each one 

 should do, and what each one should refrain 

 from doing : the whole execution of the work 

 decided upon being left completely in the 

 hands of the regular authorities. We see no 

 reason why this should be ' irksome ' to the 

 heads of the departments. We also feel that 

 Major Powell assigns undue importance to the 

 influence of the single military officer proposed 

 by the academy as one of the nine members 

 of the commission. It is not so clear to us, as 

 it seems to be to him, that one such officer 

 could leaven the whole lump of the commis- 

 sion with ideas of military discipline unsuit- 

 able to the conduct of a scientific bureau. 



But however favorably we may view the 

 plan of this commission, we must hold that 

 the consolidation of the bureaus under a single 

 head, or in a single department, would give 

 far more assurance of efficiency. Especially 

 is this the case with the two national surveys. 

 Their work now covers the same fields, and 

 their mutual interdependence is such that they 

 should work under a common plan. The geo- 

 logical survey requires for its proper execution 

 certain geodetic and astronomical work, the 

 execution of which is not within the proper 

 province of the geologist. It is absolutely 

 necessary that this geodetic and astronomical 

 work should be so planned and executed as to 

 meet the wants of the geological survey, and 



