SCIENCE. 



FRIDAY, MAY 14, 1886. 



COMMENT AND CRITICISM. 



A very important contribution to the discus- 

 sions which are now in progress with respect to 

 the scientific work of the United States govern- 

 ment has reached us within the last week. It is a 

 voluminous report of the testimony elicited by the 

 joint congressional commission, of which Senator 

 Allison is chairman, from the time when it began 

 to act. Dec. 4. 1884, until Jan. 30, 1886. This evi- 

 dence was presented in the senate on the 16th of 

 last March, and ordered to be printed. It consti- 

 tutes a book of more than eleven hundred pages, 

 in which a very copious and well-arranged index 

 is included. The first portion of this volume, in- 

 cluding the evidence which was collected during 

 the first winter of the commission's service, has 

 long been in type, and has been the basis of some 

 of our previous comments. The latter half, in- 

 cluding the testimony taken last December and 

 January, is new to us, and to that alone we now 

 call attention. In the personnel two changes 

 were made at the beginning of last winter : Sen- 

 ator Morgan tock the place of Senator Pendleton ; 

 and Mr. John T. Wait, a representative for Con- 

 necticut, the place of Mr. Theodore Lyman, a 

 representative for Massachusetts. Fourteen ses- 

 sions were held during the two months just 

 named, and die principal officers of the coast 

 survey, the geological survey, the hydrographic 

 survey, and the signal service, were examined. In 

 addition to their testimony, communications are 

 also printed from Simon Newcomb and Alex- 

 ander Agassiz. 



In a somewhat rapid examination of this 

 volume, we discover a vast amount of detailed 

 information in respect to the conduct of scientific 

 work by the government, but we do not perceive 

 any fresh contribution to the discussion of the 

 principles which should govern the organizations. 

 There is nothing to indicate the conclusions of the 

 commission, though the bias of individual mem- 

 bers may be surmised from their interrogations. 

 It would appear as if the commission had pursued 

 then inquiry with fairness and thoroughness, and 

 No. 171. — 1836. 



with a sincere desire to set before congress the 

 exact condition of affairs. It is a pity that some 

 competent person had not been employed to digest 

 the information thus laboriously collected, and to 

 present in a colorless summary the suggestions 

 which are made, pro and con, as to possible 

 changes. Professor Newcomb (Jan. 15, 1886) suc- 

 cinctly describes the situation from his point of 

 view, pointing to " the want of adequate adminis- 

 trative supervision of the work of those bureaus," 

 and declaring that he sees but one remedy, — • ; to 

 place all the scientific work of the government 

 properly so called under a single administrative 

 head, to be selected by the President." The re- 

 marks of Professor Agassiz discriminate between 

 the work which legitimately belongs to the gov- 

 ernment and that which does not ; and he refers 

 (Dec. 2, 1885) to a note which he has written to 

 the Nation, embodying his ideas in regard to all 

 this government business. 



Major Powell, in a letter to the commission, has 

 presented some criticisms of the changes pro- 

 posed. He says " that the bill [brought before 

 congress by Mr. Herbert], in prohibiting the 

 expenditure of any money for paleontological 

 work or publication, except for the collection, 

 classification, and proper care of fossils and other 

 material," practically provides for exactly the 

 paleontological work now being prosecuted by the 

 survey, but prohibits its publication. He also 

 calls attention to the popular misunderstanding 

 of the scientific conception of a theory. The bill 

 prohibits " the general discussion of the geological 

 theories." If this is used in the scientific sense, it 

 prohibits any classification, or suggestion of the 

 possible co-ordination, of the recorded facts. In 

 view of the absolute necessity of the geological 

 survey prosecuting all branches of research which 

 can in any way bear upon the knowledge sought, 

 it would be more reasonable for congress to pro- 

 vide for curtailing the expenses of the bureau, 

 causing the depletion to fall upon the entire or- 

 ganization, rather than to commit the error of 

 lopping off some branch or branches of the work. 



The question of the place and character of 

 the moral and religious instruction at Harvard 



