70 



SCIENCE. 



[X. S. Vol. XXI. No. 524. 



courses do something toward meeting this 

 need. But why not organize in every uni- 

 versity an inter-departniental congress, in 

 which members of the various departments 

 shall present, in as palatable form as possible, 

 the problems and discoveries of present interest 

 in their respective branches of learning? On 

 the face of things it would seem that such an 

 arrangement would necessarily result in an 

 added stimulus and a broader horizon for each 

 member of the statT, and a greater solidarity 

 for the whole. 



An objector will doubtless be prompt to 

 point out that the above plan, though plausible 

 on paper, would, for one reason or another, be 

 quite impossible in practise. 1 can only reply 

 that no suggestion which offers the least hope 

 of lessening the baneful effects of over-special- 

 ization ought lightly to be dismissed. Nor 

 should I be surjirised by the quite different 

 criticism that my idea utterly lacks novelty, 

 that it has long since been threshed over by 

 educational experts, perchance received a fair 

 trial somewhere. In reply, I could but cite 

 my own ignorance of these facts as a fine 

 illustration of the very conditions which I 

 have deplored. 



Bat there is another idea which T cherish 

 just as tenderly — one eciually chimerical, may- 

 hap. It is nothing more nor less than the es- 

 tablishment of a sort of human encyclopaedia 

 as an adjunct to our libraries. How much of 

 our ignorance is due to the inaccessibility of 

 knowledge ! How many questions we allow to 

 pass unanswered, rather than grope blindly 

 amongst unfamiliar volumes! The thought 

 lies near to hand that some one could save us 

 that trouble — some one who would not have to 

 grope. But who? The i)lain man sends n 

 query to his daily paper, and receives an 

 a7i-wer wliich we liope is more trustworthy 

 tliiiii tlic editorial oi)inions or news items on 

 the same .sheet. Or ho may have the temerity 

 to write to an expert, who may be good-natured 

 enougli to reply. But where in our educa- 

 tional system is the man or body of men whose 

 recognized function it is to answer questiins? 

 'I'eachers we have by the thousand, employed 

 to impart knowledge in accordance with cer- 

 tain more or less stereotyped courses of study. 



but wliere are the men whose business it is to 

 tell us just those things for which we happen 

 to be seeking? The scientific departments of 

 our government, it is true, give much expert 

 advice on various matters, in reply to corre- 

 spondents, and here, indeed, we find our most 

 instructive models. But their scope is ob- 

 viously limited. 



Suppose that one of our great libraries were 

 to employ a staff of consulting experts, men of 

 the rank of college professors, whose duty it 

 should be to furnish definite bits of informa- 

 tion in response to legitimate questions, or at 

 least to guide the seeker on his way. The 

 cost of maintaining such a library would 

 doubtless be vastly increased, perhaps doubled 

 — 1 leave that for the professional librarian 

 to compute. But over against this added cost 

 could be set the untold hours saved to the 

 student or the layman, searching in un- 

 familiar fields, and the vastly greater facility 

 of the diffusion of knowledge. My suggestion 

 might easily be caricatured into the proposal 

 that the learner should henceforth dispense 

 with books. Quite otherwise, it is my main 

 object to enable him to do more reading and 

 less groping; to peruse pages of text, instead 

 of card catalogues and tables of contents; to 

 economize time, and to minimize the loss of 

 energy through friction. 



In the case of a university libi-ary, could not 

 such relations be maintained with the faculty 

 as to permit of members of the latter body 

 being called in for expert advice, not sporad- 

 ically, but as a part of the organic system ? 

 This would throw an additional burden upon 

 the teaching staff, which woidd, of course, 

 need to be increased numerically. But would 

 not such a function compare favorably in use- 

 f Lihiess with the teaching of various prescribed 

 subjects to apathetic learners? To the over- 

 burdened specialist, such a system would 

 serve the same end as the plan first proposed, 

 giving him more ready access to other fields 

 of thought, and minimizing the evils resulting 

 from the increasing differentia lion of knowl- 

 edge. 



But here again I fear that the experts may 

 smile at my modest suggestion, either as be- 

 ing utterly impracticable, or as quite devoid 



