January 29, 1886 ] 



SCIENCE. 



101 



within the scope of the topic." The sentence 

 astonishes me, and leads me to inquire what was the 

 basis of the opinion ; for it does not appear to be in 

 the chapter itself, the arrangement of which is 

 intelligent and intelligible, and certainly not based 

 on mere fortuitous reading. The author of the 

 book, if he has read the review, must, one would 

 think, feel mortified to have such a bald accusation 

 of negligence brought against him: I trust, there- 

 fore, that you will publish this letter, to show that at 

 least one worker in this field places a higher value 

 upon his volume than your reviewer does, with his 

 paucity of commendation. 



Charles Sedgwick Minot. 



Boston, Mass., Jan. 20. 



I am under great obligation to Dr. Minot for the 

 kindness he has done me in calling attention to the 

 injustice of my recent review of Dr. Whitman's book. 

 I am myself astonished at it, and cannot comprehend 

 how I could have made so unfair a statement when 

 I intended no injustice. 



I said, This chapter furnishes much valuable in- 

 formation, but the arrangement leaves the impression 

 that it is the result of fortuitous reading rather than 

 a methodical search for the most valuable things 

 within the scope of the topic " 



The sentence as it stands leaves me indorsing what, 

 it occurred to me, might be the inference of one who 

 simply looked at the arrangement of the chapter as 

 made up of the separate consideration of so many 

 isolated animals — e.g., Clepsine, Spirorbis borealis, 

 Myzostoma, Sagitta, etc. — instead of classes of ani- 

 mals. What I should have added was, that such an 

 impression would be entirely misleading. I had not 

 the least idea of making that impression represent my 

 opinion, but quite the reverse, for it was in direct 

 opposition to my positive knowledge ; no one, perhaps, 

 realizing better than I that the author's work had 

 been of the most painstaking and discriminating 

 kind. In my estimation, moreover, there was no 

 zoologist in this country who possessed in so great a 

 degree the experience and the other qualifications 

 necessary to the successful handling of this topic. 



As regards the general tone of the criticism, I can 

 only say that the esteem in which I hold the author 

 made me distrustful of my ability to praise his work 

 judiciously, and ihat in avoiding one extreme I have 

 fallen into the error of the opposite, and appear only 

 to criticise where there is much more that I ought to 

 have praised. Edward L. Mark. 



Cambridge, Jan. 25. 



Cost of scientific books. 



A goodly proportion of the book-notices in your 

 periodical contain a statement to the effect that the 

 publisher has been too profuse in his paper ; that he 

 ought to use a poorer and thinner quality, and sell 

 the book at halt' the price. This betrays a lamen- 

 table ignorance on the part of your critics, and, 

 besides, conveys a very erroneous impression. Paper 

 is a very inconsiderable item in the cost of manufac- 

 turing a book. It is a good-sized volume which, 

 without the covers, will weigh four pounds, and 

 paper as good as that in most of the books criticised 

 costs only ten cents a pound. The utmost that could 

 be saved by lightening and cheapening would be a 

 third in weight, and two cents a pound in price, 

 thus reducing the cost of the paper of a four-pound 

 book from forty to twenty-four cents, certainly not 



enough reduction to allow the price of the book to be 

 reduced from four to two dollars. 



The cost of the plates is the greatest item in the 

 production of a book, and the ruling price for this 

 work is eighty cents per thousand ' ems ' (a page of 

 Packard's ' Zoology ' contains about a thousand 

 ' ems '). Then all the cost of corrections, other than 

 mere typographical errors, and the cost of making 

 up the pages and inserting the cuts, are all charged 

 as time-work. The cost of corrections in scientific 

 work is enormous, and I have known it to amount to 

 one and a half times the original cost of composition. 

 A fair average for the plates for a book with the 

 same page and type as that of Packard's ' Zoology' 

 would be a dollar and a half a page. This must be 

 considered in settling the price of a book. 



Finally, the sale of strictly technical books is very 

 limited. An edition of five hundred is a good aver- 

 age ; and, were the price reduced to half the ruling 

 price, the sales would not be increased ten per cent. 

 As it is, they little more than repay the cost of pub- 

 lication, and the reduction so earnestly and igno- 

 rantly prayed for by your critics would involve the 

 publisher in a considerable pecuniary loss on every 

 strictly scientific book issued ; and a few failures of 

 that sort would make them refuse all scientific books. 



I do not wish to be understood as defending the 

 prices put on all publications ; for some the charge is 

 clearly extortionate : but, so far as I at present 

 recall, not one of those thus criticised in your columns 

 has a price higher than was necessary to reimburse 

 the publisher for his outlay, and pay him a fair 

 amount for his labor in publishing, advertising, and 

 selling the work. I hope in future your critics will 

 omit any reference to this feature in their fault- 

 finding. J. S. Kingsley, 



Maiden, Mass., Jan. 19. 



Oil on troubled waters. 



I feel that I must offer a few words of rejoinder to 

 your comments on my letter of Jan. 18, because I can- 

 not admit that there is any grave responsibility in- 

 volved in my inquiring for the proofs of an alleged 

 scientific theory, or any lack of feeling implied in my 

 protesting against a disposition to hold out a mis- 

 leading hope to ' the toilers of the sea.' 



I have not tried to throw discredit on any well- 

 directed effort to render less dangerous the hazardous 

 vocation of the sailor : I have simply attempted to 

 raise a note of caution against false inductions and 

 specious generalizations. I look upon this as a ques- 

 tion of science, not of sentiment ; and I have been 

 accustomed to regard science as a matter of hard, 

 clear facts, and keen, cold logic. 



It may possibly be that the hydrographic office is 

 affording substantial comfort to the mariner's gen- 

 erally cheerless life by disseminating the fables and 

 traditions of the sea ; but, if so, it is a purely literary 

 undertaking, not a scientific one. It may while 

 away an otherwise tedious hour or two on shipboard 

 to read, in effect, that a half-barrel of oil sprinkled 

 over the entire course between New York and Liver- 

 pool will insure a safe voyage at any time and in any 

 weather ; or that a half -gallon, poured upon oakum, 

 tied tight in a bag, and towed at the stern of a 

 vessel, will reduce the mountainous billows, ease the 

 strained sails and cordage, brace the bending spars 

 and timbers, and bring welcome, peace, and quiet 

 where all before was wild confusion and danger. 



