February 5, 1886.] 



SCIENCE. 



121 



upon the market, as might be inferred from your 

 criticism, — I trust I may be allowed a word relating 

 thereto. 



There are various uses for topographical models, 

 and that for which they are designed must necessarily 

 govern their construction. While the technical geolo- 

 gist, in considering orographic questions, finds it un- 

 desirable to exaggerate the vertical scale of his cross- 

 sections, such profiles would be absolutely useless in 

 the actual construction of a railroad. It should be 

 equally evident that the needs of school-children un- 

 der sixteen years, and those of the field geologist, are 

 not necessarily met by identical appliances. The 

 construction of suitable topographical models for use 

 in the common schools is educationally of the utmost 

 importance, and, now that the matter has been re- 

 ferred to, I hope it may receive the consideration it 

 demands. Almost every great physiographic and 

 commercial problem requires the pupil to see his lo- 

 cality and state in its vertical relations to other states 

 and countries ; and how best to enable him to do this, 

 is not solved by Professor Lesley's dictum. 



What we need to-day for educational purposes, as 

 I see it, is an accurate topographic model of every 

 state in the union, constructed in such proportions as 

 will enable the pupils, in their respective schools, to 

 use it as a working- plan for the making of a larger 

 model of their state. This map should not be isolated. 

 The pupil must see it in its horizontal and vertical 

 relationships to other states. Now, to meet these de- 

 mands, a relief- map of the United States is required, 

 in which both the horizontal and vertical elements 

 for each state may be measured with sufficient accu- 

 racy and facility by the pupil. Such a model must 

 be portable, very strong, and extremely clxeaj). I 

 emphasize the last, because, unless they are cheap, 

 the schools needing them most cannot have them. 

 Now. a model of the United States might be con- 

 structed, as Professor Lesley suggests, but it would 

 be useless for topographic purposes if made of any 

 portable size. Our own map has the horizontal scale 

 sixty-five miles to the inch, and it is certainly as large 

 as can be conveniently handled in the average school- 

 room. But taking the Grand Canon district as an 

 example of what might be done with both scales 

 alike, using Mr. Dutton's profile, extending from 

 the Markagunt plateau southward across the Grand 

 Canon, for data, we should have the following pro- 

 file : — 



1. Markagunt plateau 10.56S feet above sea-level, or .0295 inch. 



2. North bank of Parunuweap 4,659 " below (1) " " .013S " 



3. Depth of bed of stream .. . 1,250 " " (2) " " .0036 " 



4. Height of Vermillion Cliffs 1818 " above (2) " ".0053 " 



5. Foot of Vermillion Cliffs.. 1.363 " beow(4) " ".0040 " 



6. Brink of Permian terrace. 1,022 " above (5> " " .0030 " 



7. Foot of cliff 568 " below (6) " ".0016 " 



8. Brink of second terrace.... 1.022 " above (7) " ".0030 " 



9. Foot of second terrace 1.&3L " below (8) " " .OC57 " 



10. Brink of Grand Canon.... 113 " above (9) " ".0004 " 



11. Bed of Colorado 1,363 " below (10) " ".0040 " 



These figures are a sufficient proof of the impracti- 

 cability of making a model of any large section of 

 country without exaggerating the vertical scale, to 

 say nothing of cheaply reproducing it with any degree 

 of accuracy. Our map, constructed with the hori- 

 zontal scale 5,000 feet to the inch, that is, the same 

 as the vertical, would be about 16 rods long and 9 

 rods wide. Were it constructed with the vertical 

 scale the same as the horizontal, Mount Whitney 

 would be but .044 of an inch high ; Mount Washing- 

 ton, .018 of an inch ; and the highest point in Wis- 

 consin, .0053 of an inch. Our model has attached to 



it one of the summits of the White Mountains, both 

 scales alike, covering a rectangle 9 by 5 inches, and 

 shows in itself just what the effect of exaggeration 

 is. For my part, when I think of a mountain valley 

 represented on the model, I think of it as 65 times 

 wider than it is in the model ; and I believe that 

 pupils, if properly taught, will do so. F. H. King. 

 River Falls, Wis. 



A national university. 



The issue of Science for Dec. 11, 1885, contains an 

 article on 'A national university,' with such refer- 

 ence to my connection with the action of the Na- 

 tional educational association on this subject, some 

 years ago, as may be thought to demand my atten- 

 tion. 



In so far as the article in question deals with the 

 National educational association and its committee 

 on a national university, it is almost wholly devoid 

 of truth, as I proceed to show, with such fulness as a 

 reasonable allotment of space will allow. 



1. How does the author of that article know 

 " there is no evidence that the committee ever did 

 any active work"? The assertion is a bold one, un- 

 tempered by any qualification whatever. And yet 

 the chairman of that committee, having first sought 

 to bring the originator of this and other misrepre- 

 sentations before the bar of the national association, 

 at Detroit, in 1874, that he might then and there be 

 openly confuted, himself appeared with proof that a 

 large amount of work, in conference, by correspond- 

 ence, and by the repeated printing and circulation of 

 successive draughts of a bill, had been done by it, all 

 through a period of years. 



2. There is equal falsity in the statement that " Dr. 

 Hoyt, although chairman of the committee of the 

 national association, had never been able to get that 

 committee together, and it [the bill] was therefore 

 essentially a bill presented by a private citizen." 

 Probably there never was a meeting of any commit- 

 tee, composed, as this was, of members from each 

 and every state in the union, at which every member 

 was present ; but to say, on this account, that a com- 

 mittee, many of whose members had repeatedly con- 

 ferred with each other on the subject assigned them, 

 never had a meeting, would be a use of terms of 

 which no reasonable person would approve. As a 

 matter of fact, the members of the committee who 

 attended the sessions of the association during the 

 years in question conferred with each other ; while 

 all of the members were repeatedly communicated 

 with, and had a voice in the matter under considera- 

 tion, as truly as though every one had been present 

 at the meetings. Moreover, every report of the com- 

 mittee so agreed upon by conference and correspond- 

 ence, and presented to the association, was adopted 

 by that great body without one dissenting voice. 

 And, as for the bill at length presented to congress, 

 it was as truly matured by the committee as any bill 

 was ever matured by any committee ; for the three 

 successive tentative draughts of it, each embodying 

 some new amendment or amendments, generally con- 

 curred in, were severally sent to every member of 

 the committee, for renewed consideration. More 

 than this, copies of the bill, as amended from time 

 to time, were also sent to a large number of other 

 learned gentlemen and statesmen throughout the 

 land, for their criticism and suggestions. 



While, therefore, the bill was drawn by the chair- 



