We are able to publish in the present issue of the MONTHLY the address
given by Mr. G. K. Gilbert as retiring president of the American
Association for the Advancement of Science. The problem that he
discusses is one of the most pressing for scientific workers, while at
the same time it is of interest to everyone, and the address is at once
an important contribution to the subject and an exposition that all can
understand. The mathematical physicists find that as an abode fitted
for life the earth can not be allowed a history indefinitely long--not
longer perhaps than 20,000,000 years--while the geologists with equally
strong arguments claim a much greater antiquity. The biologists
are also concerned, owing to the time taken up by the processes of
evolution, and their facts and interests range them with the geologists
rather than with the physicists. The man not versed in science would
also prefer to assign a long history to the earth, for while he may
be ready to let the ‘dead past bury its dead,’ he looks forward even
to the distant future, and the shorter the past history of the earth
the less the time it will continue to be habitable. We have thus a
question in the solution of which all the sciences are concerned, and
one possessing a dramatic interest that appeals to everyone. The unity
of science is well illustrated by such a problem. It was the subject of
the address of the retiring president of the Association, a geologist;
it might be taken as the subject for the address of the newly elected
president, a biologist and student of the processes of evolution;
and it is one to which the president of the meeting, a mathematical
physicist, has given special attention.
* * * * *
Dr. Robert Simpson Woodward, who presided over the New York meeting of
the Association, is professor of mechanics and mathematical physics
and dean of the Faculty of Pure Science in Columbia University. He
was born at Rochester, Oakland County, Michigan, July 21, 1849,
and spent his early life on a farm with the exception of about two
years of experience in mercantile and manufacturing pursuits. He was
prepared for college at the Rochester Academy, entered the University
of Michigan in 1868, and was graduated in 1872 with the degree of C.
E. Twenty years later the same institution conferred upon him the
degree of Ph. D. While yet an undergraduate he entered the U. S. Lake
Survey, and immediately after graduation he was appointed assistant
engineer in that service. He was employed in the astronomical and
geodetic work of the Lake Survey until its completion in 1882. He then
accepted the position of assistant astronomer to the U. S. Transit of
Venus Commission and accompanied the expedition of Prof. Asaph Hall,
U. S. N., to San Antonio, Tex., to observe the transit of December,
1882. He remained with the Transit of Venus Commission until 1884,
when he resigned in order to take the position of astronomer in the
U. S. Geological Survey. After four years of service in this bureau
he resigned to accept the position of assistant in the U. S. Coast
and Geodetic Survey. This he held until 1893, when he retired from
the public service and accepted the call of Columbia University to
the chair of mechanics. In 1895, and again in 1900, he was elected
to the deanship of the graduate faculty of pure science in that
institution. Professor Woodward has published many papers on subjects
in astronomy, geodesy, mathematics and mechanics. He edited, and
contributed several chapters to the final report of the U. S. Lake
Survey, a volume of about one thousand quarto pages devoted chiefly to
a discussion of the geodetic work of the Survey done during the forty
years of its existence. He is the author of several of the Bulletins
of the U. S. Geological Survey, and of a memoir on the Iced Bar and
Long Tape Base Apparatus of the U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey.
These forms of apparatus, devised and perfected by him, involve many
novel features and secure a much higher precision at a much smaller
cost than apparatus previously used. He prepared for the Smithsonian
Institution a volume entitled ‘Geographical Tables,’ being a manual
for astronomers, geographers, engineers and cartographers, published
in 1894. Several of his most important mathematical papers relate to
geophysics, especially those bearing on the secular cooling and cubical
contraction of the earth, on the form and position of the sea surface,
and on the profoundly difficult problem presented by the recently
discovered phenomenon of the variation of terrestrial latitudes.
Although most of his publications are necessarily of a highly technical
character, his semi-popular addresses and reviews have been widely read
and appreciated. Professor Woodward was an associate editor of the
‘Annals of Mathematics’ from 1889 to 1899 and has been an associate
editor of ‘Science’ since 1894. He has taken an active part in the
work of the scientific societies with which he is connected, and in
addition to the official positions he holds in the American Association
for the Advancement of Science, he has been honored by election to the
presidency of the American Mathematical Society and to the presidency
of the New York Academy of Sciences. Professor Woodward represents
the highest type of the man of science. Eminent for his original
contributions to science, a teacher of great intellectual and moral
influence, an administrator with unfailing tact and unerring judgment,
he confers an honor on the Association which has elected him to its
highest office.
* * * * *
President Low welcomed the American Association to New York and to
Columbia University in an address which recounted the increased
recognition given to science by the city since the Association met
there thirteen years ago and the great progress of science itself. He
concluded with the following words: “I am especially glad to welcome
you because you are an Association for the _Advancement_ of Science.
That, after all, is what ought to make you feel at home in the
atmosphere of this university; for a university that does not assist
the advancement of science has hardly a right to call itself by that
great name. I heard Phillips Brooks say, in a sermon that I heard him
preach in Boston when this Association met there twenty years ago,
that you can get no idea of eternity, by adding century to century or
by piling æon upon æon; but that, if you will remember how little you
knew when you sat at your mother’s knee to learn the alphabet, and how
with every acquisition of knowledge which has marked the intervening
years you have come to feel, not how much more you know, but how much
more there is to be known, all can get some idea of how long eternity
can be, because all can understand that there never can be time enough
to enable any one to learn all that there is to know. There is so
much to be known, that even the great advances of the last generation
do not make us feel that everything is discovered, but they appeal
to new aspirations and awaken renewed energy in order to make fresh
discoveries in a region that teems with so much that is worthy of
knowledge. I congratulate you upon your success, and I bid you welcome
to Columbia.”
* * * * *
In the course of his reply, the president of the Association, Professor
Woodward, said: “But surprising and gratifying as have been the
achievements of science in our day, their most important indication to
us is that there is indefinite room for improvement and advancement.
While we have witnessed the establishment of the two widest
generalizations of science, the doctrine of energy and the doctrine
of evolution, we have also witnessed the accumulation of an appalling
aggregate of unrelated facts. The proper interpretation of these must
lead to simplification and unification, and thence on to additional
generalizations. An almost inevitable result of the rapid developments
of the past three decades especially is that much that goes by the
name of science is quite unscientific. The elementary teaching and
the popular exposition of science have fallen, unluckily, into the
keeping largely of those who can not rise above the level of a purely
literary view of phenomena. Many of the bare facts of science are so
far stranger than fiction that the general public has become somewhat
over-credulous, and untrained minds fall an easy prey to the tricks
of the magazine romancer or to the schemes of the perpetual motion
promoter. Along with the growth of real science there has gone on also
a growth of pseudo-science. It is so much easier to accept sensational
than to interpret sound scientific literature, so much easier to
acquire the form than it is to possess the substance of thought that
the deluded enthusiast and the designing charlatan are not infrequently
mistaken by the expectant public for true men of science. There is,
therefore, plenty of work before us; and while our principal business
is the direct advancement of science, an important, though less
agreeable duty, at times, is the elimination of error and the exposure
of fraud.”
* * * * *
The meeting of the Association in New York was of more than usual
importance. Not only did the nine sections of the Association hold
their daily sessions, but there were also fifteen special scientific
societies meeting simultaneously at Columbia University. Men of science
came together from all parts of the country to present the results of
the year’s research, to gain profit and pleasure from association with
other workers, and to return to their homes with increased knowledge
and renewed interest. It is obviously impossible to give here an
account of the hundreds of scientific papers presented, or even to
report upon the general proceedings of the Association. Two of the more
important actions may, however, be mentioned. It was decided to send
‘Science,’ our weekly journal of general science, to all members of the
Association without charge, and a section devoted to physiology and
experimental medicine was established. It was thought that the receipt
of a journal such as ‘Science’ would increase the membership of the
Association and lead to a greater interest in its work, as even those
who are unable to attend the meetings will hereafter have a definite
return for membership. The Association will be greatly strengthened
by giving recognition to the great group of sciences--physiology,
experimental psychology, anatomy, embryology, histology, morphology,
pathology, bacteriology and their applications--which have developed
with such remarkable activity within the past few years.
* * * * *
It is not possible to report on the scientific work of the meeting in
part owing to its magnitude--the papers would fill the volumes of this
journal for several years to come. It is also true that each paper
taken singly is likely to be of interest only to the special student.
Specialization in science is absolutely necessary for its advance,
but the terminology required for exactness and economy makes the work
in each department scarcely intelligible to those not immediately
concerned, while the great detail necessary in careful research seems
almost trivial until we realize that it is upon such special work that
the general principles and the applications of science depend. We all
know that our ways of thought and habits of life are chiefly based
on the results of modern science. This has not been the result of a
sudden revelation, but of a continual growth, scarcely perceptible
until viewed from a distance. The importance of current political
events is magnified by the common interest they excite, whereas in
art, literature and science time is required before things can be
seen in their right perspective. We can, however, take the reports of
the three committees of the Association to which small grants were
made for research and use these as examples of the scientific work
described at the meeting. These committees were on ‘Anthropometry,’ on
‘The Quantitative Study of Variation’ and on ‘The Cave Fauna of North
America.’
* * * * *
The committee on anthropometry is undertaking to make measurements of
the physical and mental traits of members of the Association, and to
encourage such work elsewhere. At the present time there exists but
little exact knowledge of how people differ from each other and of the
causes and results of such differences. Much has been written regarding
men of genius, criminals and other classes, but without an adequate
foundation of fact. The members of a scientific society are a fairly
homogeneous class, regarding whose heredity, education and achievements
correct information can be secured. The measurements made at the New
York meeting, determining such traits as size of head, strength,
eyesight, quickness of perception, memory, etc., will supply the
standard type for scientific men and their variations from this type.
When other classes of the community have been measured, comparisons can
be made and we shall know whether scientific men are more variable than
others, have larger heads, better memory and the like. Work of this
character has been carried on at Columbia University for some years.
The freshmen, both the men of Columbia College and the women of Barnard
College, are measured and tested with care, equal attention being paid
to mental and physical traits. Then the measurements are repeated at
the end of the senior year. Anthropometric work has also been done in
Great Britain under the auspices of Dr. Galton and Professor Pearson,
and we may perhaps hope that the time will come when we shall have as
exact knowledge about human differences as we now have about different
kinds of butterflies.
* * * * *
Although geologists and botanists have defined hundreds of thousands
of species, they have not as a matter of fact until very recently
attempted to secure exact measurements of differences, and the
committee of the Association on ‘The Quantitative Study of Variation,’
of which Prof. Chas. B. Davenport is the recorder, aims to encourage
such work. It is now over forty years since the facts and arguments
presented in Darwin’s ‘Origin of Species’ paved the way for general
acceptance of the doctrine of evolution. But the objection is hardly
less valid to-day than it was then that the evidence for evolution
is almost wholly indirect. Over and over again naturalists have been
challenged to cite one case where a species in nature has changed
within historic times and repeatedly they have taken refuge in the
plea that the historic period is too short for a noticeable change to
have taken place. This plea can be accepted, however, only so long as
we have no exact way of measuring race change. When we can express
quantitatively the condition of a community to-day, we may hope to
be able to say whether any change has occurred after five, ten, or
a hundred years. The committee of the Association has especially
concerned itself with a piece of work which may be considered typical.
In the headwaters of the Tennessee River there lives a univalor mollusc
which is found nowhere else in the world and which belongs to a family
of molluscs that was early separated from its marine cogeners as a
fluviatile species. This genus, Io, varies greatly in different parts
of the Tennessee basin. In some places it is smooth; in others, spiny;
in others, long drawn out. Under a grant of the Association, Mr. C. C.
Adams, of Bloomington, Ill., visited this region; travelled down one of
the tributaries in a boat, collecting samples from every community of
Ios; and went by train up a second river collecting at every stopping
place. The results of this trip were, in a word, that in passing from
the mouth to the headwaters of the two parallel tributaries the shells
vary in parallel fashion and show a uniform, continuous change from the
spiny, elongated condition characteristic of the mouths of the rivers
to the smooth, more globose condition characteristic of the headwaters.
The additional grant by the Association of one hundred dollars will
assist Mr. Adams in making further quantitative studies on variation in
the genus Io.
* * * * *
Hardly any fact has excited more interest among evolutionists than the
blindness of cave animals; and various theories have been advanced
to explain the fact. It is known that the blind condition is due to
a degeneration of formerly functional eyes. The difficulty has been
to understand what advantage is gained by losing the eyes even in a
locality where eyes are of no use. It has been affirmed that ‘Nature
is economical’ and will not expend energy in building an unnecessary
organ. Weismann has suggested that the only reason why we have eyes at
all is because Natural Selection is constantly weeding out poor eyes.
Withdraw the necessity for good eyes, and poor eyes and good eyes will
have an equal chance of surviving. According to a third theory, the
functional activity of any organ is essential to its maintenance. Just
as the unused arm withers so the unused eye degenerates. Of course all
these theories assume that the ancestors of the blind species--for
instance, of the blind fishes--had originally no inherent tendency to
blindness or degeneration of the eyes. This assumption has, however,
been recently combatted by Professor Eigenmann, who has shown that
although many kinds of fish are accidentally swept into caves, only
one kind has become blind; of this kind the nearest allies which live
in open streams shun the light, live in crevices and under stones, and
have less perfect eyes than other fishes. Some of the allies of such
light-shunning fishes have made their way into caves, and have there
worked out their tendency to a reduction of eyes. That has been the
history of eyeless fishes. To continue the researches of Professor
Eigenmann, so auspiciously begun, the Association last year granted
one hundred dollars to a committee on the cave vertebrates of North
America. With the aid of the grant Dr. Eigenmann has during the past
year penetrated into numerous caves and obtained much additional
material for his researches.
* * * * *
The American Association will meet next year at Denver, beginning on
August 26th. The newly elected officers are:
_President._
Prof. Charles Sedgwick Minot, Harvard Medical School.
_Vice-Presidents._
Mathematics and Astronomy: Prof. James McMahon, Cornell University.
Physics: Prof. D. D. Brace, University of Nebraska.
Chemistry: Prof. John H. Long, Northwestern University.
Mechanical Science and Engineering: Prof. H. S. Jacoby, Cornell
University.
Geology and Geography: Prof. C. R. Van Hise, University of Wisconsin.
Zoölogy: President D. S. Jordan, Leland Stanford Jr. University.
Botany: B. T. Galloway, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.
C.
Anthropology: J. W. Fewkes, Bureau of Ethnology, Washington, D. C.
Economic Science and Statistics: John Hyde, Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D. C.
_Permanent Secretary._