when anatomy is applied in physiology, or when physiology is applied in ecology. While the philosophical applications of botany do not "take the eye and have the price" as do its practical applications, yet their value is universally acknowledged to be exceedingly great. They should not be left out of account in our proposals for a renewed mobilization of botanical scientists.

A consideration of these two groups of applications, called here the practical and the philosophical, will furnish a wealth of suggestions for research projects. It is the business of botanical scientists to supply all knowledge about plants that may be enquired for in behalf of any line of human activity. If we do not possess a certain kind of knowledge demanded by an art or another science, surely it is our responsibility to make the needed knowledge by research, and to do so as promptly after the need arises as is possible. Looked at in this way, the prevalent conception of botany as a composite of two different kinds of science, "pure" and "applied," is seen to strike very wide of the mark. In many ways it is to be regretted that many arts that employ applied science have come to be themselves called sciences, thus creating great confusion, but it were hopeless to try now to correct such illogical usages as those of agricultural science, medical science, veterinary science and the like. Agriculture, for example, is not a science, but an art, and whatever of science it employs is applied from botany, zoology, geology, climatology and so forth. (Of course it is understood that if plant physiology or the physiology of the wheat plant is regarded as a part of botany, so must animal physiology and the physiology of man be considered as a part of zoology.)

We are probably all in agreement as to the proposition that by far the greater portion of future botanical investigation will have to do with supplying botanical knowledge to the arts of agriculture, forestry and medicine-and the greatest of these is agriculture. Other speakers at these meeting will probably emphasize the scientific needs of this art-which they may call a science and I need not here go farther in this connection.

If you agree with me that some of our greatest responsibilities have to do with the supplying of knowledge needed by the arts and the other sciences, and if you also agree that much of our advance is to come through cooperation, it naturally follows that botanical scientists must cooperate not only among themselves but also with workers in other sciences and in the arts.

In conclusion of this address, which may already be too long, I shall not attempt to summarize the various points and suggestions to a somewhat awkward presentation of which you have so kindly and patiently listened. I have voiced a longing for a conscious cooperation among scientists that has been felt by all of us, and I have placed before you a few suggestions as to some paths along which we may hope to proceed toward the realization of this desire. This address lays no claim to logical completeness but I think I may claim for it that it is facing in the right direction. We surely need to appreciate our responsibilities as botanists toward humanity and to take conscious steps toward the organization of rational compaigns against the demons of ignorance and superstition and waste. Now is the time of times, the "zero hour"; let us assume our responsibilities and do our share in the reorganization of human life for the new day that approaches. And let us not get in each other's way nor in the way of other groups of workers. We would give once again to botanical science her "place in the sun," but we would not do this by interposing any hindrances in the paths of the other sciences, with which we have no quarrels. Finally, we would accelerate the growth and unification and organization of our national science, not that we may excel in a national way (with a sort of colossal selfishness of an all-too-common type), but that we may serve world science to our utmost, thus gaining the supreme satisfaction of having appreciated our responsibilities and borne them in such manner as to receive, at last, our own approval.

BURTON EDWARD LIVINGSTON

THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH IN ONTARIO

AND PRUSSIA COMPARED

THOSE who treat lightly the industrial research of this continent and lavish overdue praise on the research of Germany do not use a standard of measurement-a unit of population in the present case-for the comparison, which through the omission becomes a mere arbitrary opinion. A common example of this laxity is the remark of one who was speaking of the United States and Canada: "Progress along advanced industrial lines has not hitherto paralleled that of Germany." Scrutiny of the statements of such writers on industrial research always fails to show any trace of a standard used in their comparisons, and it is with a view to supply what they omit that the following particulars are compiled:

In 1909 the Ontario government commissioned Dr. John Seath to report upon industrial education, and the report he submitted ("Education for Industrial Purposes "), bearing date 1911, contains some of the latest statistics on technical education before the war, and also contains incidentally some information on the allied subject of industrial research. In particular, he gives a list (p. 161) of the thirty-three technical "schools " of university rank in Prussia which are in a position to undertake research work. This list for Prussia has more details than the similar list in the "Encyclopædia Britannica " (1910-11), which relates to the whole of Germany. The Prussian list consists of the following: nine technical schools, or polytechnica, of which the one at Charlottenburg is the chief example; three mining academies; five forest academies; four agricultural academies; five veterinary "high schools"; five commercial "high schools "; two schools of art.

Junior industrial schools and technical schools of the middle class, the former with state contributions of 38 per cent., the latter with 54 per cent., were educational, not research institutions, and did little work in research, compared with those of university rank given above. If, therefore, we add to this list of 33, the nine medical schools, which are connected with universities in Prussia,

and which are doing the public laboratory work-omitting the literary faculties of law, divinity and philosophy in the universities, which are negligible in an enquiry relating to science we get a complete census of the 42 Prussian institutions that do advanced research work. On a basis of population of 42 millions then in Prussia, we find one such institution for every million people.

Next, consider the case of Ontario, where, as in Prussia, such institutions are mainly provincial or state, and not federal. Following the same order, Ontario has: two schools of applied science and engineering ("polytechnica"); two mining schools doing assay work for the mining industries; one forestry school; one agricultural college at Guelph, doing research for the past forty years (the Ottawa college being federal). The bulletins and reports from Guelph have numbered several thousands. One veterinary college, established in 1862 as a private enterprise when there were very few on this continent, and taken over by the government of Ontario in 1908. Three laboratories, the central at Toronto, with branches at Kingston and London, Ontario, viz., one at each medical college, doing public analysis like those of the Prussian medical colleges. (The federal laboratory at Ottawa deals with adulterations.) meteorological research observatory for industries, and especially for agriculture and the shipping industries. It is now supported by federal funds but was originally a local institution in Toronto. (The agricultural academies attend to this line of research in Prussia, the meteorological institute in Berlin being mainly a collecting point.)

One

This aggregate of eleven government institutions of research for the industries of Ontario, on the basis of two and three quarter millions of population at the outbreak of the war, makes a total of four per million people, or four times the number in Prussia for the same unit of population (one million). In making this comparison where the number of institutions of research for the industries is the criterion, there is no separation of research for specific problems from research for

the general benefit of industries, as the two are so closely associated.

Comparisons of data on the numbers of officials and instructors employed, students trained (where it is a teaching institution), and public money expended, when referred to a population basis, would reveal for Ontario, if space warranted their publication, similar favorable results. And it would be easy to cite other provinces and states on this continent comparing favorably with Prussia.

It is not difficult to understand why the faith in German and Prussian "greatness" in research has become so general in America, as it was the privilege of the Germans themselves, as usual, to bell the cat. In November, 1915, a debate took place in the Reichstag over the spending of 40,000,000 marks in propagandist work in the United States of America, and a socialist member asked what good they had received from it. The outlay involved liberal sums for illustrated articles on the industrial training institutions of Germany, inserted in United States illustrated journals which circulate also in Canada. While the propagandists knew the value of advertising, many who read the articles and still derive their arguments from them failed to understand that it was advertising matter. Whatever progress Germany made was due to the application of science to the industries, and no right-minded person would begrudge them peaceable success, if their international politics had been just.

It is not surprising to find that research had been along different lines in Prussia and in Ontario, their material being received here in exchange mostly for well-developed agricultural products. The war changed this, and in a propaganda of the manufacturing classes to throw the burden of research upon the public, paid for out of the public treasuries, it is well to bear in mind the reasonable plan adopted in England of granting a pound of government aid for every pound expended by private enterprise. A. F. HUNTER

NORMAL SCHOOL BUILDING,
TORONTO

SCIENTIFIC EVENTS

THE LONDON IMPERIAL COLLEGE OF
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

WE learn from the London Times that past and present students of the Imperial College of Science and Technology at a mass meeting in the Imperial College Union, on January 29, decided, with only one dissentient, to sign a petition urging the governors of the college to take immediate steps to raise the status of the college to that of a university of technology, distinct from the University of London, and empowered to confer its own degrees. in science and technology.

The petition expressed the opinion that the recognition of the Imperial College as an institution of university rank should be one of the earliest items in the program of legislative reconstruction, and that his majesty's government should give every encouragement to students who desire to devote their lives to science and technology.

Mr. Herbert Wright, one of the governors of the college and a past student, who presided, said they were concerned with the future of the students and the future status of the Imperial College of Science matters of supreme importance not merely to themselves and those who would succeed them, but indirectly to the whole of the British Empire. The legitimate demand of the day, especially prominent in the City of London, was that there should be established a very close relationship between scientific research and industry. Furthermore, many of them held the view that no honor was too great, no distinction too high, for students who, by the application of scientific principles to the problems of daily life, increased the wealth and power of the British Empire, and added to the grand total of this world's happiness. Industrial concerns in London were strongly in favor of giving full encouragement and the highest recognition to men and women who devoted their lives to scientific and industrial research. They could rest assured that this college had been, and was still, the principal source of supply of technologists to those in charge of industry in the City of London.

$1,500 a year.

Department of Agriculture: Assistant horticulturist, March 18, $1,800 to $2,200 a year; superintendent of road construction, March 25, $150 to $250 a month; assistant dairy husbandman, March 26, $1,500 to $1,740 a year; scientific assistant, April 22-23, $900 to $1,800 a year; United States Game Warden, May 7, $1,500 a year; physical laboratory helper, March 12, April 9, May 7, and June 4, $600 to $900 a year.

Department of Commerce: Physical laboratory helper, March 12, April 9, May 7, and June 4, $600 to $900 a year; Bureau of Fisheries: Apprentice fish culturist, March 12, April 9, May 7, and June 4, $600 to $960 a year. Coast and Geodetic Survey: Marine engineer, April 1, $100 to $140 a month.

Interdepartmental Social Hygiene Board: Supervisor, social hygiene (open to women only), March 25, $2,000 to $2,500 a year; assistant special agent, social hygiene (open to women only), March 25, $600 to $1,000 a year.

National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics: Chief physicist, qualified in aeronautics, March 25, $3,000 a year; physicist, March 25, $2,100 a year.

Full information and application blanks may be obtained by addressing the United States Civil Service Commission at Washington, D. C., or the civil-service district secretary at Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Cincinnati, Chicago, St. Paul, St. Louis, New Orleans, Seattle, or San Francisco.

THE COMMITTEE ON GRANTS OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE

THE Committee on Grants was appointed by the council of the association to distribute the annual appropriation for research. It is intended that encouragement and support be given to investigations in any of the fields covered by the activities of the association. For the current year the sum of $4,000 has already been assigned, and will be available on April 1. Preference will be given to appliIcations in which definite statement is made

of expense, and the probable time for completion of the research. Recipients of grants are expected to agree to the following conditions:

1. The work as outlined will be begun in the near future and efforts will be made to complete it at as early a date as possible.

2. A report will be made to the secretary of the committee on the completion and publication of the work, and in December of each year until the work is completed. The reports will include a financial statement with vouchers for the larger items.

3. In the publication of the results the grant from the Research Fund of the American Association for the Advancement of Science will be acknowledged.

The membership of the committee for the year 1919 is: Henry Crew, chairman; N. L. Britton, W. B. Cannon, J. McK. Cattell, R. T. Chamberlin, L. I. Dublin, G. N. Lewis, G. H. Parker, Joel Stebbins, secretary.

All applications for grants should be received not later than March 15 by the secretary of the committee, who will see that they are properly considered.

JOEL STEBBINS, Secretary

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS OBSERVATORY, URBANA, ILL.

SCIENTIFIC NOTES AND NEWS PROFESSOR EDWARD L. NICHOLS, who will reach the age of sixty-five, on September 14, has tendered his resignation of the professorship of physics, at Cornell University, which he has held since 1887.

THE Paris Academy of Sciences has elected Major General Sir David Bruce, F.R.S., to be a foreign correspondent in the section of medicine and surgery.

COLONEL VICTOR C. VAUGHAN, dean of the medical school, of the University of Michigan, will return to the university and resume his duties for the second semester. Colonel Vaughan has been in Washington since the entrance of the United States into the war,