appointing. So far from recommending that the National Museum and the Bureau of Ethnology should be given greater autonomy, he proposes to administer at the expense of the government a national gallery of art and has abolished the office of director of the Bureau of Ethnology. The researches done by the institution proper are described in four lines. One memoir of an outsider and three compilations have been published. The only attempt to do anything for the diffusion of science is the reprinting (at the cost of the government) in the annual report of scientific articles from this and other journals, the sales of which in the preceding year amounted to $16.41. The international exchanges are supported by the government to the profit of the institution and, so far as they concern science at all, belong to the age of barter. It is of course easier to criticize than to outline a constructive policy. The regents will hold an adjourned meeting on March 11, when there will be opportunity for discussion of the administration of the institution. Most men of science would agree, if invited to give their opinion, that the National Museum and the Bureau of Ethnology should be given greater autonomy and that the Smithsonian Institution should be brought into closer touch with the scientific interests of the country.
Appreciation is far pleasanter than criticism, but we can not express unqualified admiration for the work of the Carnegie Institution as related in its first year-book. The trustees passed a resolution requesting the executive committee to prepare a report on the work that should be undertaken by the institution, but apparently no definite policy has been adopted. Advisory committees of scientific men were appointed, and their reports, as published in the year-book, give interesting suggestions as to the needs of science.
The members of these committees were, we understand, paid from $100 to $200 and then discharged. Were eminent lawyers, engineers or physicians retained for services so important, their fees would be from $1,000 to $10,000. Under these circumstances it is not surprising that the reports are somewhat unequal, and no attempt seems to have been made to coordinate them. There were no general meetings to consider the policy of the institution. Thus the committees on physics and on geophysics recommended an annual expenditure of $400,000, apart from buildings, publications, etc.; yet they probably do not expect the entire income of the institution to be spent as they recommend. If there is any one point on which the various committees tend to agree it is that the scientific work and policy of the institution should be directed by experts, but no provision has been made for such direction. In place of any large plans for the advancement of science, the trustees have appropriated $200,000 for subsidies which have been allotted by the executive committee. The details of these subsidies have not been published, but, in so far as they have become known, they appear to be rather obvious. Grants for the Harvard, Lick and Yerkes Observatories are safe investments, but do not appeal to the imagination. The revival of the Index Medicus is a worthy undertaking, but such a drag-net of medical literature should be supported by the physicians whose cases it further advertises. Fortunately the institution has avoided any serious errors such as the assumption of ownership of the Marine Biological Laboratory on which an option was purchased by the executive committee. The well-meaning but rather colorless policy of the institution is adequately shown by the report of the president which we reproduce.
