open sea, dense, saline and cold, to the Baltic. For this reason Mr. Huntsman suggests that the density of the surface water in which the eggs develop may be a decisive element.

In this connection, I may add a few additional data. In the group of Rock Cod or Rose-fish (Sebastina), the northern genera (Sebastes, Sebastolobus) have twenty-nine to thirty-one vertebræ, the tropical forms nearest related twenty-four, and the intermediate group of many species on both sides of the Pacific (Sebastodes and its allies) were supposed to have twenty-seven.

In verifying this statement I find that four of the more primitive of these forms (Sebastodes paucispinis, S. goodei, Rosicola pinniger and R. miniatus, have but twenty-five vertebræ, while all the others examined have twentyseven as supposed, and the metameres in the very young are also twenty-seven.

Hitherto the extinct species of this tribe have remained unknown. I have, however, lately discovered three Miocene species, which ought to throw light on the problem. At any rate they show that the variation is of long standing.

Two fossil species with thirteen dorsal species, Rixator porteousi and R. inezia, related to Sebastodes goodei, have, like the latter species, twenty-four vertebræ, besides the last one which supports the hypural. This is evidence so far as it goes that the smaller number (with greater individual development of the bones) is very ancient. Nearly all the spiny-rayed shore fishes of the present day have twenty-five.

But another fish of this type also Miocene (Sebastavus vertebralis), has thirty-two vertebræ. The relation of this species to existing forms is not close, nor is it well made out. All three of these Miocene species are found in deposits made in shallow, sheltered bays, in a temperate climate. As Mr. Huntsman observes, "A fruitful field for investigation is open in this direction." It should apparently involve both embryology and paleontology, as well as the study of adult fishes and their distribution.

DAVID STARR JORDAN

on

ABSTRACTS AND TITLES OF SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES FROM THE LIBRARIAN'S STANDPOINT

TO THE EDITOR OF SCIENCE: In his article "Scientific Abstracting" in SCIENCE for ber 30, Mr. Fulcher emphasizes the point that the time of research men should be conserved for their actual research by facilitating for them in every way the securing of the scientific information already published. No one would dispute this statement, and its truth is becoming increasingly striking as the mass of literature yearly accumulates, but it is suggested that from his list of the agencies contributing to this end as a part of what he calls " our scientific information service" Mr. Fulcher has omitted a very necessary and important agency, namely, the scientific library. A library of a scientific institution has no other purpose than to collect and make available the literature on the subjects of interest to that institution, and anything which facilitates this work is ultimately of benefit to the investigators. There is no one to whom abstracts such as those pled for by Mr. Fulcher would be of greater help than to the scientific librarian or bibliographer. As he points out, it is impossible to rely on titles alone to show the variety of information contained in an article, so that it is necessary for a librarian compiling a subject catalogue to glance through each article so that he may be sure it is entered under all the subjects of which it treats. Abstracts in the form described, with the italicized paragraph headings and subtitles would suggest at a glance possible subject headings, and in the case of articles in highly specialized subjects would frequently suggest headings which, without the abstract, only the specialist would recognize as being desirable.

Speaking of this, the present writer has thought for a long time that it would be well for persons interested in increased economy and efficiency in the recording of scientific data to give the form of titles for periodical articles careful consideration. No title can, of course, describe all the contents of an article, but many could easily be more de

scriptive than they are and contain information essential to a cataloguer or investigator, frequently obviating the necessity of an examination of the article itself to discover what it is really about. Take, for instance, titles like the following: "A spot disease of cauliflower," "Known species of smut on a new host," "A dangerous potato disease." Each of these titles shows in a general way what the article in question is about, but no one of them gives information essential for assigning subject headings, yet in each case this might have been done, still keeping the title concise and short. The title "A spot disease of cauliflower" omits the very important information that this is a new disease assigned to a new bacterial pathogene which is described in the paper, while "A spot disease of cauliflower caused by Bacterium maculicolum n. sp." gives the essential information and is not objectionably long. The title "Known species of smut on a new host" might much better be written Cintractia leucoderma on a new host, Cyperus gatesii," and "A dangerous potato disease -"A dangerous potato disease due to Rhizoctonia violacea" or "A dangerous Rhizoctonia disease of potatoes."

It may be difficult to assign satisfactory titles for articles on abstract subjects whose terminology is not definitely fixed, but in cases such as those mentioned above it is a simple matter to compose a clear and definite title giving the specific facts dealt with in the paper. The more definite titles would save time in the library not only in cataloging and bibliographical work, but would frequently prevent the necessity of the library's procuring a journal for an investigator on the chance that an article contained therein, whose title may have been seen in a catalog or list, may be on a subject in which he is interested. A clear and definite title shows at a glance whether the article should be read by an investigator working on a certain subject, while an ambiguous or indefinite title puts him under the necessity of looking up many articles only to find that they are not on his subject.

It would seem, therefore, well worth while for the National Research Council, or whatever agency is formulating the directions and rules for the preparation of analytic abstracts, to include with these directions for the preparation of titles for scientific articles. There are many points in addition to

those which have been mentioned here, which should be considered, such as, for instance, the relation of the title of a preliminary abstract to the title of the complete paper appearing later, giving the same article in different journals different titles, the publishing of different articles on the same subject with identical titles, or, the continuation of an article with a title different from that of the first installment.

EUNICE R. OBERLY

LIBRARY, BUREAU OF PLANT INDUSTRY,

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE LONGITUDINAL ELECTROMAGNETIC FORCES

TO THE EDITOR OF SCIENCE: Last spring the writer sent a note to one of our well-known and carefully edited scientific journals for its correspondence column, announcing briefly that there are a number of good reasons for concluding that the old belief (expressed by Maxwell) that electromagnetic forces can act only perpendicularly to a conductor and never in the direction of its axis, seems to be wrong, and if so, it should be corrected.

The "advisers" of the editor on subjects pertaining to physics, recommended that the note ought not to be published" as it was so subversive of long-established principles." Five weeks later, the editor returned the note unpublished.

Physicists who have a more progressive spirit and may, therefore, be interested in such "heresies," and who are not hide-bound by beliefs whose chief qualification is the age of those beliefs, will find this subject more fully discussed by the writer in an article in the Journal of the Franklin Institute for November. This is also a carefully edited scientific journal, and one of its "advisers" on physical subjects (one of our leading physicists) recommended that "it is wel! worth publishing."

Thirteen years ago, the writer described an experiment in which the result was the direct opposite to that called for by reading on it one of the most prominent of the laws stated by Maxwell. The proposed paper describing it was rejected by one of our leading societies on the ground that if true (which was very easily demonstrated) it was such a serious matter to refute one of Maxwell's laws that it ought to be kept a secret! It is needless to say that the writer published it; broad-minded electro-physicists have accepted this correction of that law.

Let us hope that our younger physicists will be more progressive and will develop the true scientific spirit of desiring to be corrected when it can be shown that what they teach their students is wrong.

PHILADELPHIA,

November 1, 1921

CARL HERING

THE SCIENTIFIC BUREAUS OF THE

GOVERNMENT

TO THE EDITOR OF SCIENCE: Since my return to Washington from my summer's field work my attention has been called several times to circulars which have been sent broadcast throughout the country by Mr. Arthur MacDonald, The Congressional, Washington, D.C., recommending the reorganization of all of the government scientific bureaus under the direction of the Smithsonian Institution. While the institution appreciates the confidence in it implied by his suggestion, I desire to point out that his scheme is entirely impracticable and was not suggested or authorized by the Smithsonian Institution, with which Mr. MacDonald is not connected in any way.

I shall be glad if you will have the goodness to publish the above in SCIENCE, in order that your readers may understand thoroughly that the institution is in no way responsible for this propaganda.

QUOTATIONS

MEETING OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION IN CANADA

66

THE American Association for the Advancement of Science is to hold its annual meeting in Toronto this winter. The rules of the association, recently revised, give the term American" a Continental instead of a national connotation, so that the visit to Canada will be regarded as a normal rather than as an extra-territorial event. There is thus a departure from the constitutional precedent of the British Association and of its French and German parallels. These bodies are national, although they welcome foreign guests, and have occasionally paid visits to foreign countries. Were the matter political, difficult questions might arise with regard to the proposed visit of the British Association to Toronto in 1924. The former visits of the British Association to Montreal and Toronto, and later to South Africa and Australia, were regarded as not different in kind from visits to Edinburgh or to Bournemouth. The formation since then of a South African Association for the Advancement of Science would certainly not place any obstacle in the way of another British visit to the Cape. The inclusion of Canada in the American sphere similarly should not affect the prospects of future visits of the British Association. It is all to the good that science should prefer geographical to political frontiers. We confess to a feeling of envy, however, when we read of the concessions made by American railways to science. The utmost efforts failed to extract from the British railways such reductions in fare to members of the British Association going to Edinburgh as they readily concede to pleasure parties and week-end excursions. The railroads of America are acting differently. Reduced rates for visitors to the Toronto meeting have been granted by all the railways of Canada and by those covering practically all the New England and Atlantic Coast States down to Virginia, and by those serving Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois. Other concessions are expected, and so far as the railway journey

is concerned, scientific men throughout the vast continent will be given every inducement to attend the Toronto meeting.-The London Times.

SCIENTIFIC BOOKS Text-Book of Geology. By AMADEUS W. GRABAU. Two volumes. Part 1, General Geology, 864 pages, 734 text figures; Part 2, Historical Geology, 976 pages, 1980 text figures. D. C. Heath & Co.

A text-book in science may be written, like other books, for name and fame; or to set forth new truth; or for desired remuneration (which may be in inverse ratio to value); or simply because the author can not help it. This latest ambitious addition to geologic literature is another expression of the mental activity and scientific industry of the author, as it is his third important and voluminous work within a few years. In 1909-1910 he published, in conjunction with H. W. Shimer, two handsome volumes on "North American Index Fossils," covering only the invertebrates, with 1762 pages and profusely illustrated. In 1913 he produced another original work, "Principles of Stratigraphy," with 1185 pages. This latest, if less original, work is even more voluminous.

Facing the writer are several shelves filled with the antiques of English and American geologic literature, text-books and treatises dating back to the early part of the last century. The striking comparison between the old and new invites a brief homily on the development of American geology, as illustrated by the text-books.

These oldest books are amusing and pitiful in their diminutive size, narrow scope, queer ideas, and their occasional illustrations of exceeding crudity. If SCIENCE admitted pictorial illustrations a comparison of the old cuts with modern engravings of the same subjects would show the progress of graphic art. The older books antedate photography, which has been the greatest aid in study of nature.

Many of the old books have a theologic flavor, and some close with a pious exhorta

tion. Beginning with Leibnitz (1646-1716) the writers sought to harmonize the facts of the new science with ancient Hebrew philosophy, and in particular tried to prove that Moses really meant "day" when he wrote it (in English). While there are yet people who give to old Hebrew literature more credence than to modern science, the time has gone by when American authors of scientific works have to defer to superstition.

Geology as a recognized branch of study in the schools is less than a century old. As a systemized branch of science and a part of general culture of the educated man geology began with Charles Lyell. His masterly writings (1830-1857) proved the continuity

ogic processes and set the standard for geologic literature. Previous to about 1840 American students relied chiefly on English works, or on American reprints. As late as 1837 Edward Hitchcock republished DelaBeche's "Researches in Theoretic Geology,” a small octavo of 342 pages and with no illustrations.

The oldest American text-book in this file is a little duodecimo of 122 pages, with 17 pages of index and errata, by W. W. Mather, entitled "Elements of Geology for the use of Schools," date 1833. This has a very few small diagrammatic illustrations. The writer's copy has pasted in the front cover a printed commendation by B. Silliman, of date June 18, 1834.

Two other old books are "Outlines of Geology," 1837, 384 pages, by J. L. Comstock; "Elements of Geology," by Charles A. Lee, 1839, 375 pages.

The second period of American geologic literature (1841-1860) began with Edward Hitchcock's "Elementary Geology," 1841. For two decades this was the American authority, and by 1860 it had run to the 30th edition, with 424 pages. The publication of a number of volumes by other authors suggests the stimulus to scientific study. Three of these had the favorite title "Elements of Geology"; by Samuel St John, 1851 (334 pp.); Justin R. Loomis, 1852 (198 pp.); Ayonzo Gray and C. B. Adams, 1853 (354

pp.). "A familiar Compend of Geology" of 150 pages by A. M. Hillside is dated 1859. The contents of these old books usually justify the modesty of their titles.

The third period of text-book evolution (1860-1904) began with Ebenezer Emmons's "Manual of Geology," 1860. This had only 297 pages, but included many illustrations. Indeed, this was the first book to make very large use of illustrations.

But in a few years Emmons's excellent work and the other books were displaced by the masterly "Manual of Geology" by James D. Dana. This was true to its title, for that time. The first edition, 1862, had 798 pages and 984 illustrations. The fourth edition, in 1895, had 1087 pages and 1575 illustrations. All the geologists of the period including the older geologists now living were "brought up" on Dana's Manual. To meet the demand for a small text Dana published in 1863 his "Text-Book," which was revised in 1897 by W. N. Rice.

The most popular work during this period for class-room use and as a treatise for general reading was Joseph LeConte's "Elements of Geology," first published in 1878. In LeConte's picturesque style, with profuse new illustrations, and emphasizing mountain structure and other features of the western part of the continent, it held the field for three decades, with several revisions; and it is yet in demand, although badly out of date on many topics. LeConte's "Compend," with 399 pages, appeared in 1884.

During the later years of this period several smaller texts appeared; by N. S. Shaler, "First Book in Geology," 1884 (255 pp.); Angelo Heilprin, "The Earth and Its Story," 1896 (267 pp.); R. S. Tarr, "Elementary Geology," 1897 (499 pp.); W. B. Scott, "An Introduction to Geology," 1897 (573 pp.). Some popular works or treatises were: Louis Agassiz, "Geological Sketches," 1866; Alexander Winchell, "Sketches of Creation," 1870; "Sparks from a Geologist's Hammer," 1870; "World Life, or Comparative Geology," 1883; T. Sterry Hunt, "Chemical and Geological Essays," 1875; J. W. Dawson, "The

Story of the Earth and Man," 1873; N. S. Shaler, "Aspects of the Earth," 1889.

The year 1888 marks an epoch in American geology, in the organization of the Geological Society of America, and the beginning of a periodical devoted entirely to geology. The American Geologist was founded and conducted by N. H. Winchell and existed to 1905, making 36 volumes. The Journal of Geology, published by the University of Chicago, began its excellent work in 1893.

The next commanding work, in succession to Hitchcock, Dana and LeConte, was the three volumes of T. C. Chamberlin and R. D. Salisbury, in 1904-1906, aggregating 2,000 pages. This may be regarded as introducing the fourth and present period of American geologic literature.

Other excellent text-books of later years are the following, omitting titles; J. C. Branner, (a syllabus) 1902; W. H. Norton, 1905; Eliot Blackwelder and H. H. Barrows, 1911; Chamberlin and Salisbury (single volume), 1914; L. V. Pirsson and Charles Schuchert, 1915 (1051 pp., 522 figures); W. J. Miller, 1916 (covering only historical geology); H. F. Cleland, 1916.

The above relates only to general geology, but the volume of earth-science literature has been increased by superior text-books in economic or industrial geology, and in physiography. The great mass of publication by the national and state surveys does not belong in this review.

Recurring now to the work in hand; it is in many respects an excellent presentation of geology to date. The writer has good literary style, direct and lucid. Most topics are well handled and many are treated with fullness and in a masterly way. This is especially true of sedimentation problems, of paleozoic stratigraphy, and of the historical part in general.

The illustrations are profuse and usually pertinent. The portraits of eminent geologists of former times will give the student a more lively human element. The paleogeɔgraphic maps, in Part II., are drawn in clear outline, and interesting comparison will be